U.N. Heads Turn in Stunned Disbelief as PLO Lies Exposed by Palestinian Hero


UN Watch lets the world know that not all Arabs that call themselves Palestinians are pleased with the government operations of the Palestinian Authority (PA) put into place under the idiotic Oslo Accords. The thing is, the PA for all intents and purposes is the functionary of the Islamic terrorists known as the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO).

 

The displeased Palestinian in this case is Mosab Hassan Yousef. Here is some background I found on him:

 

 

Mosab Hassan Yousef (Arabic: مصعب حسن يوسف‎‎; born May 5, 1978)[3] is a Palestinian who worked undercover for Israel’s internal security service Shin Bet from 1997 to 2007.

 

Shin Bet considered him its most valuable source within the Hamas leadership: the information Yousef supplied prevented dozens of suicide attacks and assassinations of Israelis, exposed numerous Hamas cells,[1] and assisted Israel in hunting down many militants, including the incarceration of his own father, a Hamas leader Sheikh Hassan Yousef.[4] In March 2010, he published his autobiography titled Son of Hamas.[5]

 

In 1999, Yousef converted to Christianity, and in 2007 moved to the United States.[2] His request for political asylum in the United States was granted pending a routine background check on June 30, 2010.[6]

 

READ THE REST (Mosab Hassan Yousef; Wikipedia; page was last edited on 9/27/17 04:23)

 

JRH 9/29/17

Please Support NCCR

*****************

U.N. Heads Turn in Stunned Disbelief as PLO Lies Exposed by Palestinian Hero

 

Sara Lynn Church links to IsraellyCool.com

That post is dated: 9/28/17

 

Sara Lynn Church posted link to video of UN Watch & Mosab Hassan Yousef exposing lies of the PA/PLO at the United Nations Human Rights Council. I’ll be cross posting this on my blogs.

 

Facebook Group: No Palestinian State!

Moderation Approved: 9/28/17 5:01 PM

 

Sara’s only intro: “Priceless”

 

VIDEO: AMBUSHED: U.N. Heads Turn in Stunned Disbelief as PLO Lies Exposed by Palestinian Hero

 

Posted by unwatch

Published on Sep 27, 2017

 

EPIC MOMENT: U.N. stunned, Palestinian delegates in shock, as UN Watch brings surprise guest speaker—Palestinian Mosab Hassan Yousef—to expose PLO lies. Watch heads turn & eyes bulge!

 

Sign up: www.unwatch.org

 

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/unwatch/videos/10154800858516561/

 

Twitter: https://twitter.com/UNWatch/status/913162716768071680

 

Transcript: https://www.unwatch.org/u-n-shock-heads-turn-stunned-disbelief-palestinian-exposes-plo-lies/

 

YouTube: https://youtu.be/c2NaiX-hvVQ

________________

Edited by John R. Houk

 

One Step Too Far


un-agenda-2030

The United Nations (UN) has been unjustifiably harsh to the Jewish State of Israel for decades. The UN has taken up the cause of Muslim nations that are closer than despotism than a democratic republic process of governing. As most Americans I am a supporter of Israel’s existence unlike most Muslims, especially the Muslim Arabs that have adopted the name Palestinian.

 

The UN hatred of Israel is good enough for me for America to pull out of the UN and defund our support for that now very crooked international body. AND YET there are many more reasons for the USA to leave the UN. Justin Smith goes over some of those reasons in which the UN has an agenda to fray the sovereign borders of all nations.

 

JRH 11/18/17

Please Support NCCR

***************

One Step Too Far

Repeal the United Nations Participation Act 

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 1/16/2017 7:17 AM

 

One more day should not pass before the United States Congress votes to immediately halt all funding to the United Nations and end our membership in the U.N., largely comprised of our enemies, which falsely presents itself as an organization dedicated to worldwide freedom, liberty and “social justice” for all. Not only does the U.N. support terrorism, it is anti-American and anti-Israeli, and through U.N. schemes, like Agenda 2030 and “sustainable development”, the U.N. promotes tyranny and the subversion of any mechanism for freedom, such as our U.S. Constitution, thus promoting the suppression of the unalienable rights of all mankind.

 

The U.N. claims that it seeks to create a peaceful world and protect human rights, and yet, many of the world’s most troublesome and violent nations and human rights violators — Russia, China, Indonesia, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and Cuba — sit on the U.N. Human Rights Council. One should recall that the United States was removed from the U.N. Human Rights High Commission in 2001, in retaliation for the U.S.’s defense of Israel, an all-time high point for U.N. hostility towards the U.S.

 

U.S. taxpayers’ money far too often is placed against American values and interests, whenever the United States gives it to the U.N. This occurs because the U.N. majority of votes is held by the undemocratic 57 member nations of the Organization for Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and the 120 member Non-Aligned Movement, chaired by Iran from 2012 to 2015. And so, the U.N.’s World Intellectual Property Organization in Geneva, heavily funded by the U.S., was able to pass dual-use nuclear technology to Iran and North Korea, without batting an eye.

 

Did this promote peace? And does arming and supplying Hamas terrorists promote peace?

 

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees has embedded itself with Hamas terrorists, who have formed close ties with the Islamic State over the past two years, and rocket arsenals have been found numerous times in UNRWA’s U.S. funded schools. UNRWA-provided construction materials are used in Hamas tunnels, which are staging areas for terrorist attacks that kill innocent Israeli citizens; and, the Leftist Obama administration must tacitly approve of this Palestinian initiative, since it has sent $380 million annually to the UNRWA.

 

In 2011, did the Durban III Conference in New York and the U.N. legitimization of the Palestinian recognition initiative promote peace or an OIC agenda?

 

Shortly after Durban III, former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton noted: “You just don’t read about it, you just don’t hear about it in the media. But the pervasiveness of the anti-Zionism and anti-Americanism is there as an undercurrent — all the time.”

 

And if the December 23rd, 2016 UN Resolution 2334 is not one step too far for the American people, just how far will we go with the U.N.’s madness? Not much further, I suspect, especially once one looks at the U.N. Resolution 16/18, the Small Arms Treaty and Agenda 2030.

 

With the treason gene dancing nimbly through her mind daily in December 2012, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton colluded with the 57 Islamic nations of the OIC to abrogate the First Amendment. They met in New York City to formulate a strategy that would convince the U.S. Senate to ratify U.N. Resolution 16/18, which criminalizes any criticism of Islam, essentially criminalizing free speech and a bedrock of our U.S. Constitution and our American heritage.

 

The Small Arms Treaty, adopted in April 2013, is another anti-American U.N. initiative aimed at the Second Amendment. It prohibits exporting conventional weapons, including personal firearms, to nations with poor human rights records. Since U.N. officials regularly fabricate “human rights abuses” against the U.S., this “treaty” would be a strong nuisance, if applied against us. Registration of all firearm imports down to the final purchaser is also demanded, which would be used as the next step towards private firearms confiscation and heavily resisted in America.

 

The U.N. currently strives to implement Agenda 2030, with its expected $3 to $5 trillion annual price-tag, and its undisguised plan for global socialism and fascism [i.e. corporatism]. Goal Ten calls on U.N. members and every single person worldwide to “reduce inequality within and among countries”, which can only be made possible, according to the U.N., “if wealth is shared and income inequality is addressed”. Basically, this confiscates Western wealth, shrinks their economies through Big Government policies and “redistributes” [gives] their money to authoritarian/ totalitarian Third World regimes, rather than their impoverished victims, keeping the tyrants in power.

 

Agenda 2030’s premise that the world’s current rate of consumption is “unsustainable” is based on fallacies straight out of Malthusian philosophy. The West does not have to reduce their consumption of everything — meat, cars, electrical appliances, convenience foods, air-conditioning, or expansive and modest housing — as suggest by U.N. globalists, in order that poor countries can have more and the world can achieve a “sustainable” balance. All that is required is keeping the independent spirit of freedom alive that opens the creative and innovative minds of men, which has always led to a prosperous reality.

 

Agenda 2030 will be forced on all the citizens of nations willing to use government coercion. Nowhere does it protect individual rights and the unalienable rights granted to all men by our Creator. Its ‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights’ absolutely denies individuals parental control over their children and the right to self-defense.

 

Thankfully, U.N. treaties, including the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, signed by any U.S. President do not hold any enforceable weight of law, even through “customary international law”, without the U.S. Senate’s imprimatur and a two-thirds majority vote, contrary to assertions by globalists, American leftists and Obama’s State Department. And even then, the U.S. Constitution cannot be superseded by international law.

 

Is it any wonder that former U.S. Representative Ron Paul (R-Texas) introduced legislation every year he was in Congress to withdraw our membership in the U.N.?

 

All Americans, who wish to preserve freedom and liberty for their children’s children and beyond, must eradicate the U.N.’s clear and present danger to the sovereignty and survival of the United States. We must fervently urge President Donald Trump and the 115th Congress to totally repeal the United Nations Participation Act of 1945 and expel the U.N. from the United States completely, releasing the $7.7 billion wasted on the U.N.’s validation of tyrants for better uses in America. And from this day ’til the end of time, let America stand only with those nations that are willing to bear any burden and fight the good fight against any foe to assure that future generations live in Freedom and Liberty.

 

By Justin O Smith

_______________

Edited by John R. Houk

Source links are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

Exploring Muslim Jew-Hatred


John R. Houk

© June 26, 2015

I find the fact that the Israeli government pulled their video “Open your eyes. Terror rules Gaza” exposing the reality that Hamas is an Islamic terrorist organization, under Western Pressure, QUITE ANNOYING. But it should come as no surprise. Jew-hatred has been around since Biblical times. The descendants traced from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob have face many occasions in which Jew-hatred with the object of destruction came sometimes justly but most often UNJUSTLY.

The Bible records God Almighty allowed punishment against the Hebrew tribes (ultimately called Jews after the last surviving Davidic Kingdom of Judah) for slipping away from their Covenant. The Jews experienced unjust destructive violence first for desiring an independent Jewish nation (Maccabees vs. Syrian remnants of Alexandrian Empire), independence from Roman suzerainty (experiencing mass dispersion after Bar Kochba [or Kokhba or Kokba]) revolt, obsessive Christian persecution from Europeans [See Also HERE] (Christ-killer blood libel and world domination blood libel) and as well as Muslim persecution encoded in the Quran (among other Islamic writings through to this present day).

Since the last Diaspora forced by the Romans the Jews living in their God ordained land was a minority UNTIL – the 20th century. Toward the end of WWI the British through the Balfour Declaration (1917) promised a return of the Jews to their Biblical Homeland. As a European power that was a member of the winning team in WWI the newly formed League of Nations awarded Administration of the Holy Land as the British Mandate of Palestine in 1922. There were 28 Articles in the Palestine Mandate and here is the introduction or preamble (uncertain if there is an actual name for that section):

The Council of the League of Nations:

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and

Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval; and

Whereas His Britannic Majesty has accepted the mandate in respect of Palestine and undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations in conformity with the following provisions; and

Whereas by the afore-mentioned Article 22 (paragraph 8), it is provided that the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory, not having been previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, shall be explicitly defined by the Council of the League Of Nations;

confirming the said Mandate, defines its terms as follows: READ THE REST (The Palestine Mandate; The Avalon Project – Yale Law School; Ratified July 24, 1922 – Avalon Copyright: © 2008 Lillian Goldman Law Library)

Largely due Jewish scientist (Pro-Zionist Chaim Weizmann) aid to the British war effort (Pronounced by PM Lloyd George but denied by Weizmann) clearly the land to be labeled Palestine was created as a future sovereign national Homeland for the Jewish people. (See more precise data at JewishHistory.org)

Just an aside here. Everyone should realize the name “Palestine” was derived from the Roman Emperor Hadrian attempt to wipe all things Jewish away after Bar Kochba’s short lived Israel liberation movement. Hadrian renamed the Jewish Homeland Palestina. The anglicized version is Palestine. Hadrian purposely used longtime enemies of Israel (i.e. the Philistines) that had zero racial connection to the Jews to wipe all things Jewish off the Roman map.

The British original intention for the name “Palestine” during the mandate to reference Jews not Arabs. The Arabs only started to adopt the name (HERE and HERE) Palestinian after 1967 when Israel defeated several invading Arab armies recapturing Judaea/Samaria and Gaza. Those areas had been occupied by invading Arab armies in 1948 trying to destroy the nascent declared Independent State of Israel who then had the purpose to drive Jews into the sea.

Now it looks like the United Nations are flowing with the propaganda originating from the Arabs that call themselves Palestinians. The UNHRC Report blames both Israel and Hamas; however Israel points out there are many holes in accusations against the IDF for war crimes.

Here is a press release attributed to Israel’s office President emailed to me via Ari Bussel on June 22 which indicates Israel read the report prior to the public release:

Israeli President Reuven Rivlin’s response to the UN report

Forwarded from Ari Bussel

Forward sent: 6/22/2015 12:18 PM

Communicated by the President’s Spokesperson

22 June 2015 / 5 Tammuz 5775

Government Press Office (GPO) English Homepage

“Just one year has passed since the Israel Defense Forces were required to stand, as a protective edge, for the people of Israel. We lost many of our loved ones, and we still await the return of two of our late sons, and we still hope for the recovery of the wounded. Also last summer, the IDF proved its strength, ability, and above all, its uniqueness, and the ethical and moral place which it holds.

I am proud, as all of Israel should be proud, of the moral strength, and the military abilities of the Israel Defense Forces. I do not see how anybody could judge us and tarnish our name. The moral dilemmas which we face require split-second decisions, when we have a duty and a right to defend the citizens of Israel – women, children, babies – under attack, and when our enemy tramples international law and uses its people as human shields.

As strong as we are, and as sophisticated as our capabilities are, it is incumbent upon us to ask: When do we use force, how do we use it and for what purpose. I have no doubt that the soldiers and officers of the IDF know to ask this question in a timely manner, and to make difficult decisions in real time, without the need for investigations by external bodies. Only one who understands what force is, understands it limits.”

For further details: Jason Pearlman, Foreign Media Advisor, jason@president.gov.il

Here is the full PDF of the UNHRC Report (my PDF copy has 183 pages).

Here is a letter from a high level international military group that essentially refutes the UNHRC Report accusations against Israel (published on June 12).

Here is the Israeli government investigative PDF report on operations of the IDF (Operation Protective Edge) and Hamas prosecution of the Gaza conflict: The 2014 Gaza Conflict – 7 July – 26 August 2014: Factual and Legal Aspect released in May 2015 (277 pages).

And here is some selected excerpts from Legal Insurrection about the truth who actually committed war crimes in the Gaza Conflict:

False statistics about civilian casualties were put out by Hamas ministries and then adopted without question by the UN, “human rights” groups, and the media to create the narrative that “most” or “almost all” or the “vast majority” of deaths were civilian.

Critics of Israel have yet to explain how Israel was supposed to stop Hamas from firing rockets, tunneling under the border, or landing commandos by sea without firing into the civilian areas from which Hamas was operating.

During the 2014 Gaza conflict, we covered the deliberate Hamas tactic of firing from civilian areas (including those next to hospitals and apartments,) as well as how Hamas used the main Gaza hospital as a military headquarters. Almost all of this was covered up by the media:

· Hamas: We intimidated reporters into not covering rocket firing

· Foreign Press Assoc protests “blatant, incessant, forceful and unorthodox” Hamas intimidation

· Watch Hamas set up and fire rocket next to residential buildings

· Hamas hides in, under and around Gaza’s main hospital, and the media covers it up

·Media cover- up of Hamas crimes starting to unravel

· More media cover-up for Hamas exposed

We were well aware of the allegations made by some governments, the United Nations, human rights groups and the media, that Israel acted outside the laws of armed conflict in Gaza. Some have suggested that the IDF lacked restraint or even deliberately targeted innocent civilians.

Our findings lead us to the opposite conclusion. We examined the circumstances that led to the tragic conflict last summer and are in no doubt that this was not a war that Israel wanted. In reality Israel sought to avoid the conflict and exercised great restraint over a period of months before the war when its citizens were targeted by sporadic rocket attacks from Gaza. …

Hamas launched attacks against Israel from the heart of its own civilian communities in Gaza and positioned its munitions and military forces there also, including in schools, hospitals and mosques. As well as carefully documented IDF evidence of this, we have viewed international media footage confirming several cases and are aware of senior Hamas officials’ own claims to have used human shields. …

Measures taken to warn civilians included phone calls, SMS messages, leaflet drops, radio broadcasts, communication via Gaza-based UN staff and the detonation of harmless warning explosive charges, known as “knock on the roof”. Where possible the IDF sought also to give guidance on safe areas and safe routes…. [Bold text this Blog Editor]

READ ENTIRETY (Getting the Gaza “war crimes” truth out, before the UN lies; Posted by William A. Jacobson; Legal Insurrection; 6/14/15 9:00pm)

The sad fact is Hamas and Palestinian Authority Arabs that call themselves Palestinians have been engrained with Jew-Hatred ever since the days of their false prophet known as Mohammed (or Muhammad or Mohamet or whatever). As I wrote earlier the Jew-Hatred is in the Islamic considered holy writings are rampant. Indeed, Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf has been a perennial best seller in Muslim markets from WWII until this present day.

This brings to the inspiration of this expose on Muslim Jew-Hatred (sugar coated by the word ‘Antisemitism’). I read a Middle East Quarterly post on the creep that exploited the Muslim encoded religious hatred of Jews to do all he could to keep Jews from returning to their Homeland before and after WWII. The notorious figure was Muhammad Hajj Amin Husseini who managed to squirrel his way with British help to become the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. This nefarious individual actually hooked up with Adolf Hitler himself to find Nazi support in aiding der Further in the Nazi Final Solution for Jews in the Muslim world. Husseini began by recruiting Bosnian Muslims to be Muslim Waffen SS Jew exterminators in the Eastern European area in what would be a Communist Yugoslavia after WWII.

VIDEO: Nazi Palestinians and the holocaust: the muslim Bosnian Waffen SS

Posted by Rauhanuskontoko

Posted on Apr 4, 2012

Nazi palestinians: Heinrich Himmlers and mufti Haj Amin Al-Husseinis plan to exterminate the jews. Palestinians and the holocaust: the muslim Bosnian Waffen SS

Egyptian Yasser Arafat who eventually led the PLO and then the PA, a consummate terrorist in his own right was an early disciple of al-Husseini at age 16. Arafat hero worshipped the old Grand Mufti so much that some sources list Arafat as a nephew, others as a distant cousin and others as a close hero worshipper.

And now it is time to read the MEQ story on the founder of modern Muslim Jew-hatred – Muhammad Haj Amin al Husseini (or the remarkable amount of alternative spellings).

JRH 6/26/15

Please Support NCCR

**************************

Hajj Amin Husseini’s Anti-Semitic Legacy

By Boris Havel

Summer 2015

Middle East Quarterly

The Jerusalem mufti, Muhammad Hajj Amin Husseini (left), meets with SS-Reichsführer Heinrich Himmler, April 1943.

The Jerusalem mufti, Muhammad Hajj Amin Husseini, leader of the Palestinian Arabs from the early 1920s to the late 1940s, is widely known for his close collaboration with the Nazis during World War II. Aspects of the collaboration remain to be more thoroughly scrutinized.[1]However, and without discounting his culpability for the collapse and dispersal of Palestinian Arab society (or al-Nakba, the catastophe, as it is called by Palestinians and Arabs), Hajj Amin’s role in shaping Muslim perceptions of Jews might be a far more important and lasting legacy than his political activism in Palestine, Germany, or elsewhere.[2] An important source supporting this fact is a booklet he authored for Muslim soldiers enlisted in the Nazi SS division in Bosnia.

During the mufti’s stay in Berlin in 1941-45, he befriended Hitler’s right-hand man, Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler. Himmler’s fascination with Islam and the mufti’s zealous support for the Nazi cause resulted in several common enterprises, notably the establishment of a volunteer Waffen-SS division in Bosnia, made up mostly of Bosnian Muslims, later named the Handzar division. Most books about the division display photographs of its soldiers—distinguishable by its insignia on uniform lapels and fez headgear—reading a booklet titled Islam und Judentum—most certainly the German version of the mufti’s Croatian or Bosnian pamphlet Islam i židovstvo (Islam and Judaism).

In whatever language the pamphlet was originally written, the intended readers were Muslims (Bosnian or otherwise) and not Germans. This author has been unable to locate a German copy of the pamphlet, but it is reasonable to regard the text written in the language of the Bosnian Muslims (at the time called Croatian) as the most relevant. A translation of the booklet is presented below, followed by an analysis of its significance and far reaching implications.[3]

Islam and Judaism (Islam i židovstvo)

For us Muslims, it is unworthy to utter the word Islam in the same breath with Judaism since Islam stands high over its perfidious adversary. Therefore, it would be wrong to carry out comparison of those two generally different counterpoints.

Unfortunately, it is insufficiently known that animosity between Islam and Judaism is not of a recent date. It reaches long back in history, all the way to the time of the Prophet Muhammad. This short historical overview will demonstrate the importance and perfidiousness of Jewry and its animosity toward the founder of Islam, the Prophet Muhammad.

Jews are known in history only as a subjugated people. Their vulgar[4] nature and insufferable stance toward the nations that offered them hospitality, and toward their neighboring nations, are the reason that those same nations had to resort to [certain] measures in order to suppress a Jew’s efforts to obtain his[5] desire by force.

The history of antiquity shows us that the pharaohs were already forced to use all means against Jewish usury and Jewish immorality. Ancient Egyptians finally expelled the Jews from their land. Led by Moses, the Jews then arrived in the Sinai desert.

Arab theologian Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari [839-923 C.E.] narrates that the Jews even wanted to kill their leader and savior Moses when he came back from Mount Sinai. Because of that, God punished them, and they had to meander in the wilderness for forty years. It should have brought them to their senses, and the new generation should have been cleansed from the low esteem of their fathers.

Following that, the Jews spread like locust all over the Arab peninsula. They came to Mecca, to Medina, to Iraq, and to Palestine, which is the land of milk and honey. The group of the Jews that came to Syria and Palestine was now under Roman rule. The Romans, however, soon discerned the peril that threatened the land from the Jews, and so they introduced harsh measures against them. Besides that, a serious, contagious illness of plague erupted, which was by common opinion brought into the land by Jews. When even medical doctors stated that the Jews were indeed the source of the infection—and their opinion was obviously correct—there arose among the people such upheaval against the Jews that many Jews were killed. In addition, that event is the reason why the Jews have been called “microbes” in Arabia to this very day.

The mufti of Jerusalem, Muhammad Hajj Amin Husseini, visits the volunteer Nazi Waffen-SS division in Bosnia, made up mostly of Bosnian Muslims. The mufti was instrumental in the division’s formation.

The Arabs have a particular understanding for introducing forceful measures against Jews in Germany and for their expulsion from the country. After the [First] World War, England and America enabled the Jews to settle in Palestine and to establish a Jewish state there. Jewish excrement from all countries assembled there, rascally striving to seize the land from Arabs. And indeed, they succeeded in buying land from the poorest of the poor and from unscrupulous landlords. By doing so, they took poor widows’ bread and stole food from children to fatten themselves.[6] When the Arabs opposed the Jewish settlement, the Jews did not shun bloody murders. So they robbed many families of their livelihood and threw the families into misery and troubles. (God will punish them for those disgraceful deeds).

The Jewish struggle against Arabs is nothing new for us, except that as time passed, the location of the battlefield changed. Jews hate Muhammad and Islam, and they hate any man who wishes to advance the prosperity of his people and to fight against Jewish lust for possessions and Jewish corruption.

Struggle between Jews and Islam began when Muhammad fled Mecca to Medina where he created the base for the development of Islam. At that time, Jews were merchants, already permeated with guile, and they understood that Muhammad’s influence, in both the spiritual and business spheres, could turn into a danger for them. Thus they were possessed by a deep hatred toward Islam; hatred that intensified as Islam was growing more solid and powerful. The Jews breached the agreement they had concluded with Muhammad in Khaibar, of which we shall speak later. Moreover, their rage grew immensely when the Qur’an revealed the deepest inclinations of their soul, their heartlessness, and unscrupulousness by which their ancestors had been commonly known. At that time, the Jewish methods were already the same as they are today. Their weapon has been, as always, slander and quarrel, and so they attempted to humiliate Muhammad in the eyes of his followers. They claimed that he was a deceiver, an enchanter, and a liar. When they did not succeed in this, they attempted to undermine Muhammad’s honor by spreading a rumor that his wife Aisha committed adultery. The purpose of spreading such a rumor was to sow doubt in the hearts of Muhammad’s followers.

When that failed, they tried to show Muhammad’s teaching in a bad light. With that purpose, several Jews converted to Islam; only a few days later, they returned to the Jewish faith. When asked why they changed their mind so suddenly, they replied that they were very willing to settle in Islam but found that all of it is nothing but a lie. The following Qur’anic verse alludes to that:

Many of those knowledgeable in the Scriptures attempt to somehow render you infidels again by converting to our religion. It was, though, nothing but their souls’ envy, when they comprehended truth.[7]

When the Jews understood that they would not reach their goal by the means used until then, they started to ask Muhammad various meaningless and unsolvable questions. Thus, they wanted to convince others that Muhammad was poor in knowledge and wisdom. However, that method achieved no success. As they were thus persuaded that Islam was deeply rooted in the hearts of the Muslims, they commenced with the attempts to destroy the Muslims. Pursuant to that goal, they paid some non-Muslim tribes to fight against Muhammad. The almighty God, however, wanted it differently. With iron fist, Muhammad defeated the rebellious tribes and conquered their city. The Jews could not bear such a defeat, and so they decided to destroy Muhammad in every way. They hired men to murder him.

The Medina Jews lived in the city district of Banu Nadir. When Muhammad came to Medina, he concluded a contract with them. One day he set out to that city district, accompanied by only ten companions, to talk to the Jews and to try to convert them to Islam. Muhammad explained the principles of Islam to the Jews, and they seemed very interested and open-minded. Yet as Muhammad was talking in a friendly way with some of the Jews, another group prepared an attempt on his life. They persuaded a man to throw a piece of rock on Muhammad’s head. Surely Muhammad would have been killed were it not for God, who warned him. An inner voice advised him to leave that place, and so the treacherous Jews could not carry out their design. Consequently Muhammad sent a companion to deliver his message to the Jews to leave the city within ten days. They had breached the contract they concluded with him by trying to take his life. Any Jew found in the city after those ten days would be punished by death.

However, some of the Jews, who outwardly accepted Islam but in their innermost remained Jewish, persuaded other Jews not to leave the city. When the ten days passed, Muhammad was forced to expel the Jews from the city by armed force. Part of the Jews fled to Khaibar and part to Syria.

The Jews who fled to Khaibar, however, would not concede defeat and decided to avenge themselves on Muhammad. For that purpose, they turned to other Khaibar Jews and to the Jews of Taima and of Wadi Qura. Together they plotted a conspiracy: With large sums of money, they agitated non-Muslim Arab tribes to attack Medina. When Muhammad discovered their plan he quickly armed his men and set out toward the plotters’ base in Khaibar. Muhammad’s companions captured Khaibar and expelled most Jews from the site. With the remaining Jews, Muhammad concluded a contract by which peace was guaranteed.

Only after that devastating defeat [of the Jews] could an Islamic Empire peacefully develop. But when one takes into account the Jewish significance, it was not to be wondered that Jews, in spite of the agreements made, did not abandon their plans and continued to try to destroy Muhammad by all available means. They invited him to a feast, and he accepted the invitation suspecting no evil. In front of him was placed a roasted lamb prepared by the Jewess Zainab, wife of Sallam ibn Mishkam.[8] The [topic of] conversation around the table was the contract and a peaceful life in mutual agreement in which they now lived. Muhammad had not the slightest suspicion about treason. The Prophet and his faithful companion Bashr ibn Bara each took a piece of lamb meat. Muhammad, however, did not swallow his bite because its taste made him suspicious.

“The bone tells me that the lamb was poisoned,” he said and called the Jewess Zainab to ask whether the meat had been poisoned. She answered, “You know I am highly esteemed by the Jews, and I acknowledge that I have poisoned the lamb. In so doing, I thought that if you were a king, I would only kill a king, but if you were indeed a prophet, you would know that the meat had been poisoned.”

Muhammad’s companion soon succumbed to the poison’s effect, whereas Muhammad, despite spitting the poisonous bite, later suffered various health disorders, and the impact of the poison had always been evident. Some historians even believe that Muhammad’s death was a consequence of that poisoning. In this matter, they refer to a hadith by Abu Huraira, whereby the Prophet said shortly before his death, “The effect of Khaibar’s feast will manifest in me until I die!”[9]

We, the Muslims, must always bear in mind the Khaibar feast. If the Jews betrayed Muhammad in such a way, why wouldn’t they treacherously persecute us today with the purpose of destroying us?!

Many books about the Waffen-SS division in Bosnia display photographs of its soldiers reading a booklet titled Islam und Judentum—most certainly the German version of the mufti’s Croatian or Bosnian pamphlet Islam i židovstvo (Islam and Judaism). The booklet offers a stark illustration of the lengths taken by the mufti to demonize Jews and Judaism and clearly was produced for propaganda and incitement purposes.

Now, the Jews were persuaded that Muhammad was immune to their attacks. Therefore, they made a decision to spread discord among the Arab tribes, so as to break the power of Islam. When Muhammad went back to Medina, he succeeded in reconciling the Arab tribes of Kawsha and Karasha,[10] which had been fighting each other ceaselessly for 120 years. In doing so, he significantly strengthened Islam’s position. Members of those two [formerly] hostile tribes became brethren in Islam, and peace
entered the city. In this regard, the Jews tried to undermine the Islamic empire.

A revengeful old man by the name of Shas ibn Qais one day walked with his friends and came across an assembly of the reconciled tribes held in city square. He could not bear to see how [the members of] those two tribes, formerly at war with each other, now communicated nicely, and so devised a hellish plan. He sent to their assembly a friend of his, knowledgeable in war poems, and persuaded him to recite some of his old poems that were full of hatred. That Jew, an outstanding orator, came indeed to the assembly and started to recite old war poems of both tribes. By doing so, he managed to find in each tribe a man in whom old hatred flared up. Those two men started to fight each other and then urged their fellow-tribesmen to take up arms. An immense tragedy would have ensued were it not for Muhammad, who learned about the fight amongst brethren and hurried up to the battlefield.

“Oh my God, are the old times returning even while I am still amongst you!” he shouted. “When I gave you Islam as religion, the old fratricidal discord was buried, and you became brothers in your hearts. Do you wish to slip into infidelity again?”

Both tribes understood that disturbances among them were sown by the Jews alone. They threw away their weapons and asked God for forgiveness, and then they hugged each other and concluded a new brotherly alliance. Regarding Shas ibn Qais the Jew, it is said in the Qur’an,

Oh, you scribes,[11] why do you prevent the believer from walking on God’s path when you are witnesses yourselves? But God is not blind for what you do.[12]

Regarding the tribes of Kawsha and Karasha, the Qur’an said,

Oh, you who believe, would you listen to those who received the Scripture, so that they would turn you into unbelievers again, after you have received faith! How can you be infidels when God’s words were read to you, and his apostle is among you? He who holds unto God has already been introduced to a straight path.[13]

Notwithstanding their attempts, the Jews never succeeded in spreading division among Muhammad’s followers and in dragging them back into infidelity. However, even after all these events should have taught them the futility of their efforts, they persistently continued to carry out their devilish plans. Once, they tried by deceit to even bring down Muhammad himself.

There was a quarrel between two Jewish tribes, and the side that was wrong held an assembly and sent its leaders to Muhammad. Those Jewish leaders said to Muhammad, “You know that we are influential people. If you support us in our dispute with our opponents, we will apply all our influence to make all Jews convert to Islam.” Muhammad, of course, dismissed them. There is a verse in the Qur’an about this event:

Be careful to make decisions according to what God has revealed and not to consider their desires. Keep your guard toward them so that they would not even partially shift you from what God has revealed to you. If they rebel, know that God will surely punish them for a part of their sins. There are, indeed, many men who are evildoers.[14]

Another example of Jewish subversive action was recorded by Ibn Abbas. At the time when Muhammad went from Mecca to Medina, prayers were directed toward Jerusalem. However, it lasted only for seventeen months. Then Muhammad received God’s revelation that the direction of prayers should be Mecca, and ever since, prayers are uttered with faces turned to Mecca. The Qur’an says about this:

We see how you turn your face toward heaven, and we would like to give it a direction which you will like: Turn your face toward the holy place of prayer; wherever you find yourselves, turn your face in that direction. Don’t you see that even those who had received the Scripture know that it is the truth before their Lord? And God is never heedless of what they do.[15]

When the Jews found out about this Qur’anic verse, they were angered and asked Muhammad to return to the previous direction of prayer, which was Jerusalem. Were he to do so, they promised, all Jews would accept Islam. Muhammad, however, did not allow himself to be led astray by such a proposal and to transgress against God’s command. We find the following in the Qur’an about that:

The direction to which you used to turn in prayer until now we have changed only for the purpose of distinguishing those who follow apostles from those who turn on their heel. That was surely difficult but not for those led by God. And God does not want to destroy your faith because God is full of goodness and compassionate to men.[16]

Here is another example how the Jews did not hesitate to stab Muhammad in the back at the time of his utmost distress. When Muhammad won the Battle of Badr, he sent a messenger on his own camel, because that camel was the fastest, to carry the news about his victory to Medina. The Jews, however, tried to bring confusion into the Muslims’ ranks by spreading false rumors that Muhammad had been killed in the battle. As evidence, they pointed out that Muhammad’s camel returned to the city with another rider.

When even that design failed, the Jews turned to Mecca to incite Muhammad’s enemies against him. Moreover, they declared their readiness to support the Meccans in their fight against Muhammad with an army of theirs. When the pagans of Mecca asked the Jews—since the Jews had received the Holy Scripture even before Muhammad—whether or not Muhammad’s religion was good, the Jews answered, “You know that we are men of letters. Believe us, therefore, when we tell you that your religion is much better.” The following verse is in the Qur’an about this:

Don’t you see those who received the Scriptures? They believe in Jibt and Taghut [superstition and idolatry], but they nevertheless say about pagans that their way is better than believers’ way. Those are the ones whom God has cursed, and he who was cursed by God cannot be helped.[17]

As we see, that curse came true. Without a homeland, the Jews are scattered throughout the whole world, and nowhere do they find true help and support. Another Qur’anic verse reads:

You will certainly find out that the greatest animosity toward the believers foster the Jews and the pagans.[18]

That idea has been even better expressed by words of Muhammad: “It will never be possible for you to see a Muslim and a Jew together without secret intention in the [heart of the] Jew to destroy the Muslim.”[19] Abu Huraira passed to us the following hadith:

Judgment Day will not come before the Muslims completely destroy the Jews, and when every tree with a Jew hidden behind will say to the Muslim, “There is a Jew behind me, kill him!” Only the gharqad tree, which is a small bush with many thorns growing around Jerusalem, will not participate in it because it is a Jewish tree! [Bukhari-Muslim VIII, p. 188].

Assessing the Pamphlet

The booklet Islam and Judaism offers a stark illustration of the lengths taken by the mufti to demonize Jews and Judaism. Qur’anic passages are freely paraphrased without reference to sura and verse while apparent quotations (like those about Jews converting insincerely to Islam in order to drag Muslims away from their faith) are nowhere to be found in the Qur’an, certainly not in the translation by Muhammed Pandža and Džemaluddin Čaušević[20] used by Yugoslav Muslims since 1937. Indicating the pamphlet’s clear propaganda and incitement purpose, this sloppiness reflected both Hajj Amin’s poor religious credentials and his apparent conviction that the pamphlet would not be subjected to critical scrutiny or even read by believers well-versed in the Qur’an. For, though bestowed with the title of Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Mandatory Palestine’s highest religious authority, it was common knowledge at the time that Hajj Amin did not possess the necessary religious credentials for such a lofty post. Indeed, he even failed to make the final short-list for the mufti’s post having received only nine of the electors’ sixty-four votes; but the Husseinis and their British champions forced one of the final three candidates to step down in his favor, paving the road to his appointment.[21]

Some of the pamphlet’s assertions indicate the mufti’s deficient familiarity with Islamic history and theology. Nor was Hajj Amin averse to introducing novelties and fabrications for the purpose of defaming Jews. His text contains details with an unconventional interpretation of Qur’anic accounts, some of them erroneous. He accuses the Jews of having “attempted to undermine Muhammad’s honor by spreading a rumor that Muhammad’s wife Aisha committed adultery.” But renowned Islamic scholars, including Tabari, to whom the mufti refers in the booklet, do not mention the Jews at all in the context of this event: Aisha’s accusers were all Arabs. Some came from the tribe of Kharzaj; at least one was from the Quraish, Muhammad’s tribe, and another was the sister of Muhammad’s wife. Their names are listed in both Ibn Ishak’s and Tabari’s accounts of the event. After God revealed Aisha’s innocence to Muhammad, some of the accusers were punished by flogging.[22]

Furthermore, the mufti claimed that Muhammad attacked Khaibar because its Jews bribed Arab tribes to attack Medina. The sources, however, do not mention any such activity by the Khaibar Jews. Khaibar was in alliance with the Arab tribe of Ghatafan—which at this point seemed to be rather defensive—with the Quraish, and with the Persians. Muhammad’s attack occurred shortly after he concluded the peace of Hudaibiya (March 628) with the Meccans. It is hard to envisage that Muhammad’s enemies would plot an attack from the north without Meccan support. On the contrary, it seems that he concluded the peace of Hudaibiya to secure his southern front so as to be able to attack the Khaibar Jews, whose Persian allies had just been defeated by the Byzantine army.[23]

There remains a deep connection between Islamism and Nazism based on the common characteristics of racism, nationalism, religious bigotry, and intolerance. Hitler’s Mein Kampf has been a bestseller for years in predominantly Muslim countries, including the Palestinian Authority and Turkey.

There was, however, an event reminiscent of the mufti’s story that occurred a year earlier. The Jews of Medina had invited the Quraish and Ghatafan tribes to attack Muhammad. It was at this point, after the Battle of Badr, that the Quraish asked the Jews whose religion was better, theirs or Muhammad’s. Encouraged by the Jews, the two tribes marched on Medina, and their subsequent abortive attack came to be known as the Battle of the Ditch. After their retreat, Muhammad attacked Medina’s Jewish tribe of Banu Quraiza.[24] It seems likely that the mufti—unless he intentionally invented stories, a possibility that cannot be ruled out—confused the episode of the Banu Quraiza with that of Muhammad’s war on Khaibar.

Far more important than these technical details and idiosyncratic interpretations are the novelties the pamphlet introduces in Islamic political discourse regarding the Jews. By combining the Islamic canon with pre-Christian and Christian anti-Judaism, it attributes strengths and powers to Jews that cannot be found in Islamic tradition by portraying them as far more cunning and successful in their vicious designs than previous mainstream Islamic thought had recognized or permitted.

A simpler example of this anti-Jewish eclecticism can be found in the mufti’s accusation that Jews brought plague to Arabia. This statement evokes medieval European myths with similar themes. More significant is the notion that Muhammad’s death might have been a result of poison given to him by a Khaibar Jewess.

To be sure, Ibn Ishak and Tabari do mention how during the illness that led to his death Muhammad spoke to Umm Bashr, mother of his poisoned companion, and complained about his pain, caused by poisonous meat he had tasted three years earlier.[25] However, in classic Islamic thought, this tradition was not interpreted as proof that the Jewess had succeeded in her attempt on the Prophet’s life but as a desire to attribute to the Prophet the highest of virtues: martyrdom. In Ibn Ishak’s words, “The Muslims considered that the apostle died as a martyr in addition to the prophetic office with which God had honored him.”[26] Tabari repeats this explanation, as does Ibn Kathir (1300-73), who referred to eight different hadiths asserting that Muhammad had been warned by God about the poison: proof of his being a genuine prophet. Conversely, Ibn Kathir states that “the Messenger of God died a martyr.”[27]

The core theme of all these traditions is the Prophet’s martyrdom and not the Jews’ lethal craft; the reader is left with the clear impression that the two phenomena were unrelated. In contrast, the mufti’s pamphlet establishes the link and changes the emphasis from the Prophet’s virtue to the Jews’ mendacity. Apparently, his intention was to draw parallels with Christian traditions regarding Christ’s killing by the Jews. This accusation was intended to provoke more anger among Muslims, but it also violated Islamic tradition and theology.

The implications of the mufti’s claim that the Jews were successful in killing Muhammad despite God’s warning imply that Jews possess the power to defy God’s will. Such a blasphemous thought would be worse than Christian accusation of deicide. Jesus overcame death, and by his suffering, death and resurrection brought salvation to his community of believers; however, Muhammad not only remained dead but also failed to appoint his successor due to the rapid progression of his illness and his sudden, untimely demise. Consequently, the umma was split by different claimants to authority, and the dispute eventually led to the fiercest internecine strife in the history of early Islam, known as the fitna.

While the mufti’s Palestinian successors would not tire of reiterating this story (as late as November 2013, Palestinian Authority minister of religious affairs Mahmoud Habbash claimed that Yasser Arafat was poisoned by the Jews just as they had poisoned the Prophet Muhammad to death),[28]most contemporary Islamic scholars have a different understanding of this hazardous theology; inasmuch, the accusation that the Jews killed the Prophet has largely faded as a theological theme with mainstream Islamic commentary viewing the Jews, along the Qur’anic derision, as “adh-dhilla wa-l-maskan,” translated by Yehoshafat Harkabi as “humiliation and wretchedness.”[29] Bernard Lewis further explained:

The outstanding characteristic, therefore, of the Jews as seen and as treated in the classical Islamic world is their unimportance. … For Muslims, he might be hostile, cunning, and vindictive, but he was weak and ineffectual—an object of ridicule, not fear. This image of weakness and insignificance could only be confirmed by the subsequent history of Jewish life in Muslim lands.[30]

Departing from this conventional view, the mufti did not interpret contemporary events as a new historical phenomenon to which Muslims should respond in a new, ad hoc manner. Instead, he traced Jewish accomplishments of the 1920s, 1930s, and 1940s, and the alleged Jewish power and ambitions, to supposed Jewish activities at the time of Muhammad. In doing so, he created a precedent, later followed by prominent Islamic actors in the Middle East and elsewhere, particularly after Israel’s stunning military victories over its Arab adversaries. Thus Hamas accuses the Jews of “wiping out the Islamic caliphate” by starting World War I and of starting the French and the communist revolutions, establishing “clandestine organizations” and financial power so as to colonize, exploit, and corrupt countries.[31] Likewise, former Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Muhammad accused Jews of ruling the world by proxy.[32] Attributing such gargantuan accomplishments to the Jews, many of them at the expense of Muslims, presents a theological innovation with an immediate political consequence. Linking early Islamic with medieval Christian depictions of Jews results in their portrayal as “a demonic entity,” thus making their “extermination legitimate.”[33]

++

Boris Havel holds an M.A. in comparative religion from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Ph.D. in international relations and national security from the University of Zagreb. He works at the Croatian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and teaches at the Biblical Institute, Zagreb, Croatia. His most recent book is An Overview of the History of Israel: From Abraham to the Modern State (Izdanja Antibarbarus, 2015).

[Foot Notes]

[1] Klaus-Michael Mallmann and Martin Cüppers, Nazi Palestine: The Plans for the Extermination of the Jews in Palestine, trans. Krista Smith (New York: Enigma Books in Association with the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, 2010), p. viii.

 

 

[2] Boris Havel, “Haj Amin al-Husseini: Herald of Religious Anti-Judaism in the Contemporary Islamic World,”The Journal of the Middle East and Africa, 3 (2014): 221-43.

 

 

[3] The following text has been translated from the original pamphlet: Veliki Muftija Jeruzalemski Hadži Emin el-Huseini, Islam I Židovstvo (Zagreb: Hrvatski tiskarski zavod, 1943). I wish to thank the staff of the National and University Library in Zagreb for tracing the booklet. The Qur’anic verses and hadith are translated as they appear in the original text.

 

 

[4] The word “prostačkoj” can also be translated as: obscene, dirty, or indecent.

 

 

[5] This word was written in singular in the original text and introduces the notion that the average Jew was such; by referring to “a Jew,” the author refers to the whole people.

 

 

[6] The mufti fails to note that prominent members of his own family, including his father, were among the “unscrupulous landlords” selling plots of land to the Jews. See Efraim Karsh, Palestine Betrayed (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2010), pp. 15-19.

 

 

[7] Sura 2:109.-Ed.

 

 

[8] Ibn-Ishak, The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn Ishaq’s “Sirat Rasul Allah” by A. Guillaume(Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2004; repr., 1967), p. 516; Tabari, The History of al-Tabari [Ta’rikh al-Rusul Wa-l-Muluk] (New York: State University of New York Press, 1987-97), vol. VIII, pp. 123-4.- Ed.

 

 

[9] Bukhari’s Hadith, 4.394.-Ed.

 

 

[10] The author probably refers to the Arab tribes of Aws and Kharzaj though the transliteration (Kauša i Karaša) barely resembles those names.

 

 

[11] The word “pismenjaci” refers to the “People of the Book” (sljedbenici knjige in Čaušević-Pandža).

 

 

[12] Sura 3:99.-Ed.

 

 

[13] Sura 3:99-101.-Ed.

 

 

[14] Sura 5:41-5.-Ed.

 

 

[15] Sura 2:144-9.-Ed.

 

 

[16] Sura 2:142-3.-Ed.

 

 

[17] Sura 4:51-5.-Ed.

 

 

[18] Sura 5:82.-Ed.

 

 

[19] There is no Qur’anic verse with this message. The mufti perhaps refers to a non-canonical hadith or obscure tradition.

 

 

[20] Muhammed Pandža and Džemaluddin Čaušević (eds.), Kuran, Sedmo Izdanje (South Birmingham: Islamic Relief, 1937-89). Though the Qur’an condemns those who falsely feigned Islamic belief (e.g., sura 2:8-9, or sura 63), this condemnation does not specifically apply to the Jews but rather to the wider category of “hypocrites.”

 

 

[21] Karsh, Palestine Betrayed, p. 17; David Dalin and John Rothmann, Icon of Evil: Hitler’s Mufti and the Rise of Radical Islam (New York: Random House, 2008), p. 252.

 

 

[22] Ibn-Ishak, The Life of Muhammad, pp. 492-9; Tabari, The History of al-Tabari, vol. VIII, pp. 57-67; Qur’an: sura 24:11-26.

 

 

[23] Michael Lecker, “The Hudaybiyya-Treaty and the Expedition against Khaybar,” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam, 5 (1984), pp. 1-12.

 

 

[24] Ibn-Ishak, The Life of Muhammad, pp. 450-69.

 

 

[25] Tabari, The History of al-Tabari, vol VIII, p. 124.

 

 

[26] Ibn-Ishak, The Life of Muhammad, p. 516.

 

 

[27] Ibn-Kathir, The Life of the Prophet Muhammad (al-Sira al-Nabawiyya), trans. Trevor Le Gassick (Reading: Garnet Publishing, 2000-06), vol. 3, pp. 283-7.

 

 

[28] Palestinian Authority TV, Nov. 8, 2013; “PA: Arafat was poisoned by Jews like Islam’s Prophet Muhammad,” trans. Palestinian Media Watch, Nov. 12, 2013.

 

 

[29] Yehoshafat Harkabi, Arab Attitudes to Israel (Jerusalem: Israel Universities Press, 1972), p. 220.

 

 

[30] Bernard Lewis, Semites and Anti-Semites (London: Phoenix, 1997), pp. 117-39.

 

 

[31] See, for example, “Hamas Covenant 1988,” Yale Law School Avalon Project, accessed Mar. 14, 2015.

 

 

[32] CNN, Oct. 16, 2003.

 

 

[33] Moshe Sharon, Jihad: Islam against Israel and the West (Jerusalem: Moshe Sharon, 2007), pp. 77-8

_________________________

Exploring Muslim Jew-Hatred

John R. Houk

© June 26, 2015

_________________________

Hajj Amin Husseini’s Anti-Semitic Legacy

This text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete and accurate information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.

©1994-2015 The Middle East Forum

DONATE

Threats – a Juvenile Prank or Serious Issue


Basharat Khokher - UNHCR Entrance

Shamim Masih writes about religious minorities fleeing Pakistan. Shamim enlightens us that after fleeing Pakistan their refugee status often is a harrowing experience in itself.

 

I added a couple of explanatory links that was not a part of Shamim’s original submission. As I was looking for further information I found some information I found interesting. I am going to add these as a kind of addendum after Shamim’s financial support information.

 

JRH 4/17/14

Please Support NCCR

******************************

Threats – a Juvenile Prank or Serious Issue

 

By Shamim Masih

Sent: 4/15/2014 10:34 PM

 

ISLAMABAD: Religious persecution is not the only reason which compels Pakistanis to seek asylum elsewhere. Many a time, Pakistanis are forced to flee from their country because of their affiliation or lack of the same thoughts. I always wonder, was the country made only for single Muslim school of thought, who always attack on other faiths and threaten them to leave the country? No not, Pakistan is just as much a home to Christians, Hindus, Ahmadis and Shias and nobody has the right to expel anyone from their homeland. However, expulsion continues to take place at gun point and many a time over the lifeless bodies of loved ones. In fact we always think that misfortune always falls on other people and somehow we always stay away from such things until the violence strikes at our home.

 

I see many Pakistanis are seeking asylum in foreign countries and most of them instigate violence themselves and ignite the fury of others so that they can seek political or religious asylum in foreign countries. Many Christian families are living in UK, USA, Canada and other European countries. Seeking asylum is not easy and people who say that people do it deliberately should go to see, where many asylum seekers from different countries work day in and day out to feed their families. Seeing their faces will make you understand that what they have chosen has been the lesser of two evils as a last resort.

 

According to the sources, around 8000 families are seeking asylum in Thailand, Sri Lanka, and Malaysia. Most of the asylum seekers who leave Pakistan in hopes of a better and safer future reached destitute or have meager funds which only last for a very small period of time. Most of them have to accept odd jobs and work at less than minimum wage until their resident status is approved by the immigration authorities. But I don’t see any positive response from the authorities or United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). The Colombo Gazette reported that there are around 600 Pakistani Christians that are currently seeking asylum in Sri Lanka.

 

Many of the families have sold their houses and lost their job in hopes of a better and safer future, told Basharat Khokher after his visit to Thailand, Sri Lanka and Malaysia. According to Basharat Khokhar some Human Right Champions are involved in human trafficking in the name of asylum in different countries. He condemns this act of Human Right Organization instead being supportive they are playing with their future. He said he met with many families there and now some of them are [desiring return] to rejoin their jobs, realizing the situation and bleak future.

 

He mentioned Pakistan European Christian Association – PECA and few others, I tried to call on the given number and have left messages but there is no response so far.

 

Nazir S Bhatti, President Pakistan Christian Congress – PCC have expressed his concern over the unprecedented delay shown by UNHCR offices in Sri Lanka, Malaysia and Thailand in processing applications for thousands of Pakistani Christian asylum seekers. The PCC chief appealed to UN secretary general Ban Ki Moon that cases of the Pakistani Christians in these countries be considered on a priority bases for refugee status. He said they are living in miserable human conditions for years and have been waiting for their applications to be considered.

 

Refugees have no right to work legally, and it is difficult to find employment, even in the informal sector. Most urban refugees in Thailand live a precarious existence: unable to work, often unable to send their children to school, they are typically financially stressed, dependent on ad-hoc charity to survive, at risk of exploitation and constantly worried about being arrested and indefinitely detained. Most of them reached there with a genuine passport and tourist visa. They are usually exhausted most of their savings to come to Thailand. Once their tourist visas expire, under Thai law, they are considered illegal migrants. As a result, they are at constant risk of arrest and extort refugees and then release them, but arrest can also result in indefinite detention. Pakistani Christians often face harassment and discrimination in churches from the Thai community. Many were unaware how difficult conditions would be in Thailand before they came, often having been misled by “agents or people-smugglers.”

 

Even if refugees obtain refugee status, their chances of being resettled outside of Thailand are not high, and they face serious ongoing protection problems while they remain in Thailand.

 

I left their shops and homes with a very heavy heart, fervently praying that Pakistan would once again become a tolerant and progressive society where people can enjoy equal rights.

 

Be Blessed,

Shamim Masih

________________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Brackets indicate editorial additions of the Editor.

 

© Shamim Masih

Special Correspondents

Daily Khabrian (PakBiz.com description) & Channel – 5

Human Rights Activist

 

Snapshot of Human Rights Activism from 2011

Christian Rights Activist
Freelance Journalist 

Secretary General of Information

Pakistan Christian Congress

 

Shamim Masih’s Donate/Support info:

 

Editor: For Americans especially, I have discovered the best way to donate to Shamim Masih is via Western Union sending to a Western Union agent in Islamabad.

 

FOR USD TRANSFER.
Intermediary Bank:                         MASHREQ BANK, NEW YORK
Intermediary Bank SWIFT BIC:         MSHQUS33
Beneficiary Bank:                         JS BANK LIMITED
Beneficiary Bank SWIFT BIC:                 JSBLPKKA
Bank A/c # at Intermediary bank:         70008227
Title Of a/c                                Shamim Masih
Beneficiary Account Number:                 405527

Top of Form

IBAN #                                        pk80jsbl9530000000405227

FOR GBP TRANSFER.
Intermediary Bank:                         MASHREQ BANK, LONDON
Intermediary Bank SWIFT BIC:         MSHQGB2L
Beneficiary Bank:                         JS BANK LIMITED
Beneficiary Bank SWIFT BIC:                 JSBLPKKA
Bank A/c # at Intermediary bank:         00010855
Title Of a/c                                Shamim Masih
Beneficiary Account Number:                 405527
IBAN #                                        pk80jsbl9530000000405227

FOR EURO TRANSFER.
Intermediary Bank:                         MASHREQ BANK, LONDON
Intermediary Bank SWIFT BIC:         MSHQGB2L
Beneficiary Bank:                         JS BANK LIMITED
Beneficiary Bank SWIFT BIC:                 JSBLPKKA
Bank A/c # at Intermediary bank:         10847
Title Of a/c                                Shamim Masih
Beneficiary Account Number:                 405527
IBAN #                                        pk80jsbl9530000000405227

**************************************

Another exodus of refugees from Pakistan

 

BANGKOK – It has been a year since 14-year-old Samantha moved with her parents, elder sister and elder brother to Bangkok. She still does not clearly understand why they left their home in Lahore and moved to Thailand. All she knows is that her father was in trouble back in their hometown and some bad people wanted to kill him to avenge what they said was his unruly behaviour and remarks that he supposedly made at his workplace that resulted in a fight. In Bangkok she spends her time playing games on computer and playing with a large number of young children also from Pakistan and some Thai children that also live in the same compound. She has picked up a number of Thai words and proudly claims to be an expert in conversation with local Thai people.

Talking to this scribe the other day Samantha said she was very happy but missed her school. “Uncle nothing has changed as we eat the same Pakistani food and go to church every Sunday. I am leader among the youngsters here and they all call me deedi (elder sister),” she proudly said.

The scribe has been living with Pakistani families seeking asylum and refugee status in Thailand for more than two weeks. …  This report, however, is just based on findings in Thailand where these people are referred to as urban refugees and are mostly living in the suburbs of Bangkok.

 

Pakistani Christians in the last two years have moved in large numbers to Thailand. The problems they face at the hands of extremists are just beginning of their ordeal. Their first test comes at Karachi, Lahore and Islamabad airports. They are asked hefty amounts to board the plane by immigration officials. On average one family of four people pay $800 to $1,000 for embarking on the plane. Mrs Sarfaraz Jacob who moved from Lahore in January with her daughter, son and daughter-in-law was offloaded for not paying the bribe. The next day she again tried and was able to negotiate their exit for $800. The officials do not take bribe in rupees and demand payment only in dollars. “I pleaded with them that the money I had was my pension and gratuity of public sector service as a teacher. They paid no heed to my requests and said I was going to seek asylum abroad,” she said. Interestingly all the travel documents and visas of these people are genuine and the authorities have no right to stop them.

 

When they arrive in Bangkok the real test begins. After filing for asylum they have to wait for nearly three to four months for call from UNHCR. They are given asylum seeking certificates. But during this period they are at risk of getting caught by local police as their visas expire after two months. They have to pay hefty amounts as bribe to cops to escape detention. After getting asylum seeking certificates then begins the wait for second call for interview which usually comes after one year, 18 months or after two years. During this period if they fall sick they can be treated at some designated hospitals after getting clearance from Bangkok Refugee Centre (from where they also get medicines for common diseases and illnesses). BRC medical unit is …

 

During the period of their application if some person falls sick and dies it becomes very difficult to bury the dead. A child of one Javed died soon after birth. It cost 1,800 bhat to get him buried. No welfare organisation helped in the burial. Sharoon Gill was a civil engineer in Pakistan. His mother passed away last December after renal failure due to depression and loneliness. His mother’s body was cremated and sent to Pakistan for burial. “My daughter and son were school going in Pakistan. Their only complaint was of not wearing uniform and attending school. They would look at Thai children in envy and used to ask me when they would go to school. Thank God now they attend school as I and my wife teach at this refugee school,” he revealed. There is donor fatigue and the local churches have also stopped supporting the asylum seekers and refugees.

 

Life is not easy for those who leave Pakistan and dream of finding peace again. Bangkok is an expensive city and they have to look after themselves for nearly three years before their refugee process is complete and they may be given the option to settle in third country by the UNHCR. They have to pay for food and lodgings. The last ordeal comes when they are ready to leave Thailand. According to local law the family must live in Immigration Detention Centre for seven days before leaving. They can escape detention by paying fine of 20,000 bhat each.

 

 

“In Thailand there are about 120,000 refugees in nine camps. Then there are about 1,000 Rohingyas. For the urban refugees we have to differentiate between asylum seekers and refugees. All asylum seekers seek refugee status but not all get that. We do individual refugee determination, which is also why it takes so long even after they get registered. It is a very intensive process. You get called in for first interview. Then it is very in-depth process, where we find out as to why did the person leave his home country.

 

 

Considering the situation it is high time for the Pakistan government to take up this issue and end the woes of minorities and ethnic groups who are persecuted by extremists in the name of religion or for their own vested interests. The solution to Pakistani refugees’ problems needs to be explored by the Pakistan government to end their medical insurance exploitation. (Another exodus of refugees from Pakistan; By EMANUEL SARFRAZ; The Nation; 3/19/14)

+++++++++++++++++++

PAKISTAN: Legalising prostitution — the Wisdom of the UN?!

 

According to a research, modern day trafficking, aka slavery is a $32 billion annual industry and according to the U.N. about 2.5 million people around the world are ensnared in the web of human trafficking at any given time.  The usual victims of atrocious crimes of sexual and gender based violence, including rape against women & girls (young, adolescents and teen) are poor, uneducated, rural and trafficked ones.

 

 

… According to a news report published in the Express Tribune (Pakistan) on 24, February 2014, the country may join the group of some 44 countries already on the ‘Tier 2 Watch List’ as human trafficking is rising in the country at an alarming level – the number of most-wanted human traffickers in the country has jumped from 89 to 141 in the last four years.

 

 

Ps: I want to quote Ms.Nasreen Azher, former member of the National commission on the status of Women, a renowned and highly respected woman rights activist of Pakistan who while responding to my email on this issue to some important human rights, child rights and women rights network in Pakistan wrote “I agree Rakhshanda. That the UN is even considering legalizing prostitution is outrageous. It shows how the market is ruling the world and corrupting human values and causing human suffering. The pimps, exploiters and, of course, the traffickers, as well as  those who buy sexual services should be penalized.  Thanks for sharing. Regards.Nasreen” (PAKISTAN: Legalising prostitution — the Wisdom of the UN?! By Dr.Rakhshinda Perveen; Asian Human Rights Commission; 3/25/14)

 

++++++++++++++++++++++

REPORT: AT LEAST 700 CHRISTIAN WOMEN FORCED INTO ISLAMIC MARRIAGES YEARLY IN PAKISTAN

 

A new report reveals that at least 700 Christian women are kidnapped and forced into conversion to Islam and Islamic marriages in Pakistan each year.

 

According to the Fides agency, the Solidarity and Peace Movement, a coalition of non-governmental organizations, associations, and institutions, including the Justice and Peace Commission of the Pakistani Bishops, has prepared the alarming report. The report also revealed that about 300 Hindu women experience the same fate each year in Pakistan.

 

The authors of the “Forced Marriages and Forced Conversions in the Christian Community of Pakistan” report have cautioned, however, that the number of women cited is the official number of reported cases; “the true extent of the problem is probably much bigger, since many cases are not reported.”

 

The report explains that the Christian and Hindu women cited are between the ages of 12 and 25, from poor families and lower social classes. Many of the kidnappings are never filed as complaints due to fear of threats. In the cases that do make it to court, the women are often abused and intimidated, then claim they have converted and married freely, leading to the dismissal of these cases.

 

“Under the custody of the kidnapper, she may suffer sexual violence, forced prostitution, domestic abuse and beatings, if not human trafficking,” the report notes.

 

… (REPORT: AT LEAST 700 CHRISTIAN WOMEN FORCED INTO ISLAMIC MARRIAGES YEARLY IN PAKISTAN; By DR. SUSAN BERRY; wahdat News; 4/11/14)   

Powerful Islamist Org. Ramps Up War on Free Speech in West


Stop Global Islamization

In the spirit of my last post concerning Geert Wilders giving a little correction to Pope Francis’ claim that authentic Islam is not violent, here is the Clarion Project exposing the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) for telling us Islam trumps Free Speech.

 

JRH 12/12/13

Please Support NCCR

******************************

Powerful Islamist Org. Ramps Up War on Free Speech in West

The primary objective of the OIC is to pressure Western countries into passing laws that would ban ‘negative stereotyping of Islam.’

 

By SOEREN KERN

December 12, 2013

The Clarion Project

 

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation, an influential bloc of 57 Muslim countries, has released the latest edition of its annual “Islamophobia” report.

 

The “Sixth OIC Observatory Report on Islamophobia: October 2012-September 2013” is a 94-page document purporting to “offer a comprehensive picture of Islamophobia, as it exists mainly in contemporary Western societies.”

 

The primary objective of the OIC—headquartered in Saudi Arabia and funded by dozens of Muslim countries that systematically persecute Christians and Jews—has long been to pressure Western countries into passing laws that would ban “negative stereotyping of Islam.”

 

In this context, the OIC’s annual Islamophobia report—an integral part of a sustained effort to prove the existence of a “culture of intolerance of Islam and Muslims” in the West—is in essence a lobbying tool to pressure Western governments to outlaw all forms of “Islamophobia,” a nebulous concept invented by the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1990s.

 

The OIC report comprises five main chapters and several annexes aimed at documenting “incidents of slandering and demeaning Muslims and their sacred symbols including attacks on mosques, verbal abuses and physical attacks against adherents of Islam, mainly due to their cultural traits.”

 

But the common thread that binds the entire document together is the OIC’s repeated insistence that the main culprit responsible for “the institutionalization of Islamophobia” in Western countries is freedom of speech, which the OIC claims has “contributed enormously to snowball Islamophobia and manipulate the mindset of ordinary Western people to develop a ‘phobia’ of Islam and Muslims.”

 

According to the OIC, freedom of expression is shielding “the perpetrators of Islamophobia, who seek to propagate irrational fear and intolerance of Islam, [who] have time and again aroused unwarranted tension, suspicion and unrest in societies by slandering the Islamic faith through gross distortions and misrepresentations and by encroaching on and denigrating the religious sentiments of Muslims.”

 

Chapter 1 of the report deals with “Islamophobia, Intolerance and Discrimination against Muslims,” and purports to reveal the “unabated rise of Islamophobia in Western countries, thereby exacerbating tensions at all levels and constituting additional obstacles to the diversity and multicultural fabrics of the societies.”

 

According to the OIC, freedom of speech is to blame for the “perpetuation of Islamophobia,” which:

 

“…has become increasingly widespread, which, in turn, has caused an increase in the actual number of hate crimes committed against Muslims. These crimes range from the usual verbal abuse and discrimination, particularly in the fields of education and employment, to other acts of violence and vandalism, including physical assaults, attacks on Islamic centers and the desecration of mosques and cemeteries.”

 

“In this context, acceptance of various forms of intolerance, including hate speech and the propagation of negative stereotypes against Islam and Muslims in some western countries contribute towards proliferation of intolerant societies. This process is further supported by… the exploitation of freedom of expression and perpetuation of an ideological context advocating an inescapable conflict of civilizations.”

 

Another factor favoring “the climate of intolerance” is:

 

“…the negative role played by major media outlets who not only propagate stereotypes and misperceptions about Islam, but also undermine and usually keep shadowed any meaningful instance of individuals or groups speaking out against intolerance, including advocacy of religious hatred and violence. This biased approach of the media has helped drawing an emphatically demonized, sometimes dehumanized, image of Muslims in the minds of a certain class of people which is predisposed to xenophobic feelings due to the increasingly dire economic situation, or the simply to the irrational fear of the other.”

 

Chapter 2 of the report deals with “Manifestations of Islamophobia in the West.” According to the OIC:

 

“The number of Islamophobic incidents continues to rise in the US, as a result of anti-Muslim propaganda. It is particularly alarming that anti-Muslim sentiments are taking deeper roots infiltrating further in the educational system. Notable among several other worrying trends/cases are: the initiatives taken by a leading and powerful US legislator [US Representative Peter King] to convene special Congressional Hearings on Radicalization of Islam in the US… In the same vein, the Republican Party in the recent 2013 [sic] US Presidential elections also used the anti-Islam card as a strategy.”

 

“With regard to Islamophobic trends in Europe, various reports and polls have revealed growing misperception vis-à-vis Islam and Muslims. Among the most common and recurring… are the ideas that Muslims are inclined to violence including revenge and retaliation; that Islam is an inherently expansionist religion, which strives for political influence, and whose followers are obsessed with proselytizing others, and more generally that Islam deprives women of their rights and encourages religious fanaticism and radicalism. According to the same polls, only a minor portion of the public tends to see Islam in a more positive light, as being a religion of peace that preaches love for neighbors, charity, openness and tolerance… Muslims who live in xenophobic environments are more exposed to daily stress and other forms of moral prejudice.”

 

The OIC concludes that “journalists and media organizations have a responsibility to avoid promoting rhetoric of hate by acting as a platform for its widespread dissemination.”

 

Chapter 3 of the OIC report highlights “Some Positive Developments” in terms of initiatives and other steps and positions taken to combat Islamophobia, including:

 

“…the condemnation of anti-Muslim hate speech by various quarters, including non-Muslim religious leaders; the barring from entry of certain Islamophobes to a number of countries where they intended to take part in anti-Muslim rallies or deliver inflammatory lectures; the recognition of Muslim holidays and other strict sanctions taken against acts of manifest religious intolerance. It was noted with satisfaction that a number of international organizations, including UNSECO, the OSCE and the Council of Europe, have recognized the danger posed by Islamophobia and have taken concrete steps to combat it, notably by laying down Guidelines for Educators on Countering Intolerance and Discrimination against Muslims.”

 

Chapter 4 of the report, “OIC Initiatives and Activities to Counter Islamophobia,” focused on the OIC’s ongoing efforts to promote the so-called Istanbul Process, an aggressive effort by Muslim countries to make it an international crime to criticize Islam. The explicit aim of the Istanbul Process is to enshrine in international law a global ban on all critical scrutiny of Islam and Islamic Sharia law.

 

In recent years, the OIC has been engaged in a determined diplomatic offensive to persuade Western democracies to implement United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) Resolution 16/18, which calls on all countries to combat “intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization of… religion and belief.” (Analysis of the OIC’s war on free speech can be found here and here.)

 

Resolution 16/18, which was adopted at HRC headquarters in Geneva in March 2011 (with the support of the Obama Administration)—together with the OIC-sponsored Resolution 66/167, which was quietly approved by the 193-member UN General Assembly on December 19, 2011—is widely viewed as marking a significant step forward in OIC efforts to advance the international legal concept of defaming Islam.

 

Chapter 5 of the OIC report provides a set of conclusions and recommendations, which call on Western governments, international organizations and non-state actors to:

 

“Take all necessary measures within their power and legal/jurisdictional systems to ensure a safe environment free from Islamophobic harassment… by strictly enforcing applicable hate crime and discrimination laws;

 

“Create, whenever necessary, specialized bodies and initiatives in order to combat Islamophobia… based on internationally recognized human rights principles and standards;

 

“Combat Islamophobic hate crimes, which can be fuelled by Islamophobic hate speech in the media and on the Internet;

 

“Take all necessary measures to ensure that the media refrains from serving as a platform for the dissemination of hate speech… by associating extremism and terrorism to Islam and Muslims… and presents the true positive nature of Islam.

 

“Implement provisions of UNHRC Resolution 16/18 through the Istanbul Process mechanism as it offers a positive platform for debate, exchange of best practices and maintaining of a common and unified stance.”

 

The report states that “the OIC and the Member States should not be complacent in underscoring the fact that our present day world is gradually being driven towards the dangerous precipices of growing intolerance of religious and cultural diversity. This is the clear and present danger that the OIC has been consistent in warning the international community against. The sooner the phenomenon of Islamophobia is addressed, the better it is for ensuring peaceful coexistence of the present as well for the future generations to come.”

 

The report concludes with the transcript of a speech by OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, in which he thanks American and European political leaders for their help (here and here) in advancing his efforts to restrict free speech in the West.

 

“The Istanbul Process initiated with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Catherine Ashton … must be carried forward … the Istanbul Process must also be seen as a poster child of OIC-US-EU cooperation …” Ihsanoglu said.

___________________________________

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute. He is also Senior Fellow for European Politics at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group. Follow him on Facebook.

 

Copyright © 2013 Clarion Project, Inc. All rights reserved.

 

About Clarion Project

Leave Islam – Convert to Christianity – Die


Hossein Soodmand (Left) - Mashad Soodman

 

John R. Houk

© August 29, 2011

 

Iran executes their citizens for leaving Islam and converting to Christianity. And yet Iran has joined the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (formerly Conference – OIC) agenda of criminalizing people who have insulted Islam. Trust me; it is not difficult to insult Islam. The mere criticism of the darker side of Islam, such as the Quranic suras that originated in Medina rather than the pre-Hegira Meccan suras is an insult worthy of death. Criticizing Sharia Law is worthy of death. Criticizing the decisions of Mohammed is worthy of death. Critically analyzing Islam’s deity known as Allah is worthy of death. AND SO, leaving Islam to convert to Christianity is worthy of death.

 

The OIC influenced United Nations Assembly Resolution originally known as Defamation of Religions makes it illegal to criticize Islam in nations that signed off on UN resolution. Where is the outrage when Christians are persecuted for their faith? Make no mistake a person or people who convert to Christianity are Christians. To not recognize this is an act of persecution in Muslim nations against Christians. The recent consensus of the UNHRC to switch the focus of Defamation of Religions from religions to individuals is all a matter of semantics. The focus is still on individuals that might insult Islam rather than on individuals (especially Muslim individuals) going beyond the insult right on to the realm of acts of violence that too often lead to death of a non-Muslim adherent especially of Christian individuals. The glaring sadness of Christians being persecuted is that the Muslim State legalizes said persecution by codifying the persecution in the rule of law. Hence when a Muslim converts to Christianity in a Muslim nation the rule of law often stipulates that this insult to Islam can ONLY find justice in the execution of the Christian. NOW that is real Defamation of Religions.

 

JRH 8/29/11

Islamic Apologetics Still Desire to Limit Free Speech


Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu - Hilary Clinton

 

John R. Houk

© August 18, 2011

 

The Organization of the Islamic Conference – NOW Cooperation (OIC) has been pushing Western nations to make any perceived insult of Islam as hate speech and a hate crime that should be prosecuted. This OIC agenda is nothing more than a push to prevent any criticism of the dark side of Islam by criminalizing Free Speech. This OIC agenda in affect also hampers Religious Freedom because it places all other religions (and atheism) in a position under Islamic Supremacism. The OIC agenda of criminalizing criticism of Islam is focused only on Islam. Islamic proponents on the other hand can write and speak any malicious opinion about any other religion. Islamic proponents habitually insult Judaism and Christianity. Judaism is on the top of that Islamic-hate list by calling Jews the descendants of pigs and apes or by writing about killing Jews wherever you can find them. These concepts come from Islamic holy writing such as the Quran and Hadith.

 

Many Nations with the USA leading the way condemned the original UNGA Resolution termed Defamation of Religions as focusing too little on Free Speech and Religious Freedom. The U.N. Human Right Commission then watered down the original Defamation of Religions Resolution to switch the focus from religions to individuals. This is to say the same measuring stick is used of what is considered hate speech or a hate crime; however if a person is incited to violence because he feels his religion was insulted then the defined inciters are responsible for any acts of violence. Thus the OIC is wagging it’s holier than all religions finger at the West because Anders Breivik massacred youths and adults to the tune of 76 because he hates Muslim immigrants. Someone should remind the OIC no Muslims were targeted by Breivik. Breivik targeted his own ethnic Norwegians as a part of his delusion to cause European chaos as a precursor to ushering in his New European Order.

 

The OIC has successfully lobbied at the U.N. General Assembly to pass a non-binding resolution to criminalize criticism of Islam. For a nation to make it illegal to criticize Islam all that is needed is to sign on to the UNGA Resolution. In America signing on to such a resolution would contradict the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution that guarantees Free Speech and Religious Freedom to all.

 

The Gates of Vienna reporting on the new Resolution quotes public statements roughly given by OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu and Secretary of State of the USA Hilary Clinton at a human rights meeting in Istanbul, Turkey:

 

He [SlantRight Editor: i.e. Ihsanoglu] said challenges remain.

“However, the test would lie in the implementation. Having been successful at consensus building, we must now act in concert to build on the consensus. The adoption of the resolution does not mark the end of the road. It rather signifies a beginning based on a new approach to deal with the whole set of interrelated issues,” said Ihsanoglu. “Resolution 16/18 provides a good basis for concerted action by states, at both national and international levels and must be utilized accordingly. Otherwise, we would be faced with the unaffordable risk of the agenda being hijacked and set by radicals and non-state actors.”

Ihsanoglu said there was a delicate balance between freedom of expression and incendiary speech.

“We continue to be particularly disturbed by attitudes of certain individuals or groups exploiting the freedom of expression to incite hatred by demonizing purposefully the religions and their followers. Though we respect their freedom of opinion and expression, we find these attitudes politically and ethically incorrect and insensitive.”

At the meeting, Clinton discussed how to build on a UN Human Rights Council resolution passed on March 24 that calls for promoting tolerance and respect for diversity of beliefs, without restricting legitimate free speech.

Clinton agreed to pursue a new religious tolerance agreement, which respects free expression of religious beliefs in order to resolve debates over religion between the West and the Islamic world.

“Together we have begun to overcome the false divide that pits religious sensitivities against freedom of religion,” Clinton said. “We are pursuing a new approach based on concrete steps to fight intolerance wherever it occurs. “

Speaking of the United States, Clinton said: “We have seen in the United States how the incendiary actions of just a very few people can create wide ripples of intolerance, so we are focused on promoting interfaith education and collaboration, enforcing anti-discrimination laws, protecting the rights of all people to worship as they choose, and to use some old-fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming so that people don’t feel that they have the support to do what we abhor.”

[…]

She commended the Organization of Islamic Cooperation for its work securing the passage of Resolution 16/18 at the Human Rights Council.

“Resolution 16/18 calls upon states to protect freedom of religion, to counter offensive expression through education, interfaith dialogue, and public debate, and to prohibit discrimination, profiling, and hate crimes, but not to criminalize speech unless there is an incitement to imminent violence. We will be looking to all countries to hold themselves accountable and to join us in reporting to the UN’s Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights on their progress in taking these steps.” (Emphasis added by Gates of Vienna)

 

Note that Ihsanoglu’s used the term “freedom of expression”. Ihsanoglu is really meaning Free Speech. Ihsanoglu still wants the West to dilute Free Speech when it offends religion. By “religion” we all know he means Islam. The verbiage to include all religions is a mere bone to toss to the West to paint the mirage of fairness to all religions. As I stated above we know that Ihsanoglu is referring to Islam because he knows that not one nation in the Islamic dominated parts of the world will NOT limit Islamic Supremacism in its intolerance of other religions, especially the existence of Christianity and Judaism.

 

When Secretary Clinton claims there is a very few people causing “incendiary actions” “can create wide ripples of intolerance”. Do you think the incendiary actions are perhaps the work of violence advocating perhaps by the Ku Klux Klan, Neo-Nazis such as Skin Heads or Arian Nation types, extremist hate the government right wing militias, perhaps by violent pro-Jewish organization and violence advocating radical Muslims and so on?

 

Without being specific Secretary Clinton is speaking of anti-Jihad/expose the dark side of Islam writers and speakers. This is the category of people that drives Muslims from moderate to radical crazy because casts portions of Islam in a bad light. Those Muslims that have the closest affinity to Sharia Law are indeed potential people that read exposés and react violently. Clinton’s words smack of the language of Marxist/Leninism in which the politburo controls the minds and words of the people to force compliance to the will of the State.

 

As Americans are we to throw out the First Amendment because a large chunk of Muslims can’t handle the truth about their history or the verses of peace abrogated by the verses of violence in their Quran and affirmed in their Hadith and Sira?

 

Well I for one am not going to roll over without some contribution to legally support the Constitution of the United States of America in the face of a supremacist religion that attempts to control Free Speech. 

 

JRH 8/18/11

****************************

US State Dept joins effort to criminalize free speech

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton working with UN, OIC to criminalize free speech!

 

Sent by ACT for America  

Sent: 8/17/2011 1:48 PM

 

The assault on our Constitution continues.

As we have reported extensively, Captain Paul Fields was disciplined for refusing to obey an order that violated his constitutional rights. We are certain a Muslim police officer would not have been ordered by the Tulsa police chief to attend Christian church services and Sunday school classes.

Now read the latest attack on our freedoms below, posted recently in Jihad Watch (highlights added). The OIC (Organization of the Islamic Conference) continues its assault on free speech at the UN through the advance of resolution 16/18 [SlantRight Editor: Here is the text]. This resolution, cloaked in terms such as “defamation of religion,” is a thinly veiled attempt to criminalize speech that criticizes Islam.

But now, in an ominous development, according to a story published by the International Islamic News Agency, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has joined the effort to implement this effort to criminalize free speech.

 

[SlantRight Editor: The below quote from ACT is something I included in a larger quote above.]

______________________

 

Secretary of State Clinton says State Department will coordinate with OIC on legal ways to implement UN’s resolution criminalizing “defamation of religion”

 

Jihad Watch

 

Moving rapidly to criminalize telling the truth about how Islamic jihadists use the texts and teachings of Islam to encourage violence and supremacism. Free Speech Death Watch Alert, and an update on this story: “OIC/Islamophobia: OIC Observatory warned since 2009 against the growth of the extreme right in Europe, Washington plans to host a meeting on resolution opposing defamation of religions,” from the International Islamic News Agency, August 1 (thanks to all who sent this in):

 

JEDDAH, Ramadan 1/Aug 1 (IINA)-During the next few months, Washington plans to host a coordination meeting to discuss with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) how to implement resolution no. 16/18 on combating defamation of religions, and how to prevent stereotypes depicting religions and their followers; as well as disseminating religious tolerance, which has been endorsed by the UN Human Rights Council last March, in agreement with Western countries. The resolution was adopted after lengthy discussions held between the OIC and countries in which the phenomenon of Islamophobia is in the rise.

The U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had announced the intention of the U.S. State Department to organize a coordination meeting during her participation in the meeting which she co-chaired with the OIC Secretary General, Professor Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu in Istanbul on 15 July 2011. The meeting issued a joint statement emphasizing the dire need for the implementation of resolution 16/18.

According to informed sources in the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the two sides, in addition to other European parties, will hold a number of specialized meetings of experts in law and religion in order to finalize the legal aspect on how to better implement the UN resolution.

The sources said that the upcoming meetings aim at developing a legal basis for the UN Human Rights Council’s resolution which help in enacting domestic laws for the countries involved in the issue, as well as formulating international laws preventing inciting hatred resulting from the continued defamation of religions.

On the other hand, the OIC Secretary General, Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, stressed that the crime committed recently in Norway was a result of the rise of the extreme right in Europe and its easy mobility in political circles. He said that the OIC had warned several times against of what might be called institutionalization of the phenomenon of Islamophobia through the involvement of the European extreme right in government institutions and political action….

____________________________

Islamic Apologetics Still Desire to Limit Free Speech

John R. Houk

© August 18, 2011

_____________________________________

US State Dept joins effort to criminalize free speech

 

ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam. We are only as strong as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more secure.