Latest Entry: American Pravda and New York's Sixth Crime Family     Latest Comments: Talk Back Here

« '2008 The Year Man-made Global Warming Was Disproved' ? | Main | How Israel's operation against Hamas was carried out through disinformation, secrecy and deceptions »

December 28, 2008

Dialogue of Civilizations: '(Islam's) attempts at creating an alternative reality'

Topics: Understanding Islam
... A little more on Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, the Turkish "historian of Islamic science" whose outward appearance is so deceptively modern and secular and sweet-reasonable, and then one realizes that that is merely camouflage and that his mental baggage, while not quite as primitive as that of the qaradawis and tantawis, is from the same product line manufactured by Islamic Tourister - Jihad Watch
Islam and it's puppets at the UN continue to try to create an alternative reality in which, Islam is defined exclusively as the religion of peace and no terrorist can ever be described as a Muslim or said to be acting in the name of Islam; in which freedom of expression is merely a license to insult Islam and offend Muslims; and where criticism of any aspect of the Sharia is condemned as "Islamophobia" and incitement to hatred. This alternative reality is then presented by the Organization of the Islamic Conference as the only acceptable basis for a "Dialogue of Civilizations".

According to Robert Spencer at Jihad Watch,  former president of the International Humanist and Ethical Union Roy W. Brown was so outraged by the speech by Ambassador Saad Eddin Taib, adviser to the Secretary General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, at the UN, Geneva on December 19, that he has deconstructed the Ambassador's speech and put it together again as it would have been given by an honest man speaking the truth.

Here are a few excerpts from his deconstruction:
Those of you who read the report of the statements at the OIC celebration of the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights at the UN in Geneva on 19 December might have been forgiven for concluding that the OIC was either suffering from a severe case of collective schizophrenia or has fallen into the hands of a latter-day Dr Goebbels, so contradictory were the speeches and so outrageous were some of the claims:

The Secretary General of the OIC, Prof. Elmeleddin Ihsanoglu for example, stated in his keynote address that:

... the OIC is firmly committed to respect for freedom of expression which is a fundamental human right. The OIC is not looking for limitation or restrictions of this freedom beyond those that already have been set by Articles 19 and 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

One wonders therefore why the OIC has, for the last decade, been promoting with great success resolutions prohibiting "defamation of religions" at the United Nations.

Professor Ihsanoglu's statement was flatly contradicted half an hour later by his advisor, Ambassador Saad Eddin Taib, who described freedom of expression as "a dishonest intellectual slight of hand [sic]" and "a trickery tool which is being exploited to cover up and conceal the real aim of Islamophobia".

The speech by Ambassador Taib - which, luckily, had to be cut to five minutes because of time constraints - contains many distortions, errors of fact and serious omissions. But his speech was fully consistent with the OIC's attempts to create an alternative reality in which Islam is defined exclusively as the religion of peace and no terrorist can ever be described as a Muslim or said to be acting in the name of Islam; in which freedom of expression is merely a license to insult Islam and offend Muslims; and where criticism of any aspect of the Sharia is condemned as "Islamophobia" and incitement to hatred. This alternative reality is then presented by the OIC as the only acceptable basis for a "Dialogue of Civilizations". 

Nevertheless, in this season of goodwill and for the sake of clarification I felt I should attempt to correct the errors of fact and replace some of the more egregious omissions in the Ambassador's statement. I have therefore taken the liberty of editing his speech to better reflect what I believe His Excellency, the former Moroccan Ambassador to Japan, would have wished to say had he not been constrained by the OIC agenda and been able to speak freely.

I have retained the deleted text, but stricken through like this, and the added text is shown in bold italics.

Human Rights and Cultural Diversity - Challenges and Perspectives

Ambassador Saad Eddin Taib, advisor to the OIC Secretary General:

[The speech begins with words of thanks for the opportunity to address the meeting]

It is very much comforting that the Islamic Religion is distinguished from other previous religions and traditions by having an elaborate and clear code for Human Rights even though this code discriminates against women and non-Muslims and is incompatible with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Islam has linked these rights with a legal divine framework, thus bestowing on them a binding and inviolable character, as a part of Islamic teaching, and rendering them unalterable by democratic means.

Islam was a message of change. It brought about historic changes in the domain of religion, economy, culture, moral and values. These changes are now fixed eternally and no further change is possible. This message has changed the course of history.

The sources of Islamic Sharia (the Qur'an and hadith) are replete with texts which recall the equality of all human beings regardless of race, colour, gender, belief or economic or social position, as well as texts which state quite the opposite, prescribing brutal punishments such as amputation and execution by stoning, and excoriating Jews, Christians, homosexuals and non-believers. In Islam, Islamic justice, untainted by Western ideas of due process, is the absolute standard and the basis of government. It calls for tolerance, compassion, mercy, and the respect of the dignity of Muslims, human beings but not of course for personal autonomy, and especially not of women.

Continue reading:  Dialogue of Civilizations: Creating an alternative reality.

The best way to describe Secretary General of the OIC, Prof. Elmeleddin Ihsanoglu is, as Roy Brown pointed out on Dec. 20th in his analysis of the Organization of the Islamic Conference's attempts to destroy the freedom of speech, "Against free speech, but for it":
On 2 December 2008, the General Secretariat of the OIC released a statement that is utterly breathtaking in its duplicity. I feel it must be refuted. The statement is entitled "Islam, the Religion of peace, tolerance and compassion". It begins:

"With the multiplicity of terrorist attacks perpetrated recently by deviant and fanatic individuals, the General Secretariat of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) has noticed a tendency of a section of the media, to interpose the word "Islam" in reporting these incidences."

"Noted a tendency"? Whyever could this possibly be? Could it perhaps be because the terrorists shout "Allahu Akbar!" when launching their attacks?
... Or leave video testimonies calling for all Muslims to join them in a Holy War against the infidel while calling for the establishment of a global caliphate? Might this perhaps have misled some commentators into believing that these "deviant and fanatic individuals" have something to do with Islam? Or, perhaps they have been misled by the slogan of the Muslim Brotherhood, "Death in the path of Allah is the greatest glory," into thinking that Allah has something to do with Islam.

The OIC statement continues:

"Islam, the religion of peace, tolerance and compassion, that sanctifies the human soul, and whose universal message is one of mutual peaceful coexistence among all the peoples of the world, regardless of their ethnicities, race, religions, and which calls for kind reasoning and dialogue with all their fellow human beings, abhors and despises all such criminal acts and had enacted the utmost severe punishment for their perpetrators."

But peaceful coexistence with non-Muslims only ever applies as long as they show their submission to Islam by paying the jizya, protection money, and accept their state of dhimmitude, and maybe not even then. Evidence the million Jews who have been forced from their homes in Arab lands and the 400,000 Christians who have been driven from Iraq by Islamists (who of course have nothing to do with Islam) since the American-led invasion.

The statement goes on:

Related: How the Islamic states dominate the UN Human Rights Council

Posted by Hyscience at December 28, 2008 8:37 AM

I am unable to understand this post. But well some points are useful for me.

Posted by: Fleedixfefs at January 20, 2009 10:46 AM

Articles Related to Understanding Islam: