Home  |   Jihad Watch  |   Horowitz  |   Archive  |   Columnists  |     DHFC  |  Store  |   Contact  |   Links  |   Search Tuesday, February 20, 2018
FrontPageMag Article
Write Comment View Comments Printable Article Email Article
Symposium: Islamic Cultural Genocide By: Jamie Glazov
FrontPageMagazine.com | Friday, June 06, 2008

In this special edition of Frontpage Symposium, we have gathered a distinguished panel to discuss Islam's eradication of other cultures, communities, identities and ideas. We will also explore the origins within Islam that spawn this impulse for genocide. Our guests today are:

Rev. Keith Roderick, a defender of religious prisoners of conscience since 1982 as the Director of the Society of St. Stephen and Co-Director of the International Taskforce on Soviet Jewery. After responding to the appeals of Coptic Christians in 1987, he began working for Christians and other minorities from predominantly Muslim countries. He organized the Coalition for the Defense of Human Rights in 1993, the largest umbrella organization representing these minorities. Fr. Roderick also serves as the Washington Representative of Christian Solidarity International and is the Canon for Persecuted Christians for the Diocese of Quincy, the only Canon defending persecuted Christians in the Episcopal Church.

Peter BetBasoo, co-founder and director of the Assyrian International News Agency (www.aina.org). He was born in Baghdad in 1963 and emigrated to the U.S. in 1974. He obtained a B.S. in Geology at the University of Illinois Chicago (1980-1985) and a minor in Philosophy. In 2002, he worked in the State Department's Future of Iraq Project, in the Water, Agriculture and Environment group. In 2007, he authored the report, Incipient Genocide: The Ethnic Cleansing of the Assyrians of Iraq.

Abul Kasem, an ex-Muslim who is the author of hundreds of articles and several books on Islam including, Women in Islam. He was a contributor to the book Leaving Islam – Apostates Speak Out as well as to Beyond Jihad: Critical Views From Inside Islam.

[No pic available for
security reasons]

Thomas Haidon, a commentator on Islamic issues.


Dr. Moorthy Muthuswamy, an expert on terrorism in India. He grew up in India, where he had firsthand experience with political Islam and jihad. He moved to America in 1984 to pursue graduate studies. In 1992, he received a doctorate in nuclear physics from Stony Brook University, New York. Since 1999 he has extensively published ideas on neutralizing political Islam's terror war as it is imposed on unbelievers. He is the author of the new book, The Art of War on Terror: Triumphing over Political Islam and the Axis of Jihad.

FP: Rev. Keith Roderick, Peter BetBasoo, Abul Kasem, Thomas Haidon and Dr. Mutthuswamy, welcome to Frontpage Symposium.

Peter BetBasoo, let’s begin with you.

Pave the foundation for us for a discussion on Islamic cultural genocide.

BetBasoo: Thank you, Jamie. First I would like to send my greetings to the distinguished panelists, especially Rev. Roderick, with whom I have worked on many occasions since 1995.

There is a pernicious and deadly effect of Islam that manifests itself only when a long range study of Islam's interaction with non-Muslim cultures is undertaken; that effect is Islam's eradication of other cultures and communities, identities and ideas. When Islam comes to dominate other cultures, those other cultures are often destroyed.

One can state that other religions or empires have the same effect, that the culture of the ruling class tends to permeate the masses and is absorbed by them, leading to the assimilation of the conquered population into the ruling culture. This is true on a superficial level. One can point to India, for example, and note the British influence on that culture. But tellingly absent in that analogy is Christianity. The British were not there to Christianize the Indians, they were just building an empire, and their domination was more imperial than religious. Indeed, the religious element was not significant in the mundane, day-to-day British bureaucratic administration of India.

As for religious domination, one can state that Christianity has imposed its "culture" on all those who have been Christianized. Again this is true to an extent, but the fact that we have Christians who are Assyrians, Armenians, Copts, Bulgarians, Romanians, Russians, Spaniards, Italians, Englishmen, Koreans, Chinese, Nigerians, Ethiopeans, says otherwise. These cultures survived and thrived after accepting Christianity. Christianity does not inherently impose a political system/state.

So what's different about Islam? In a word: Shari'a. Islam does not distinguish between religion and state. In Islam, the religion is the state, and the state is the religion. In Christianity there is a distinction between church and state, it is articulated by the Lord Jesus himself (“Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”). So when the British, as imperialists, went into India, they did not go with the intent of transforming that country into a Christian land. The Christian missionary enterprise is separate from the national imperial enterprise (though these sometime do go hand-in-hand).

In Islam the state/religion assumes total control over a conquered population, and because the Koran asserts that no law can supersede the Shari'a, the laws and customs of the conquered culture are set immediately at odds with Shari'a. One has to give, and since in these situations Islam is dominant, it prevails. How it practically prevails is by imposing on the non-Muslim cultures oppressive and restrictive conditions, designed to make the non-Muslims live in abject humiliation and --crucially -- for them to be aware of it. For example, soon after the Caliphs established themselves in Baghdad they levied the Jizya on Christians, Jews and Zoroastrians (the Dhimmis, recognized people of the book); they also established special dress codes for the Dhimmis, they ordered the Dhimmis not to wear the color green, never to ride horses, only to use wooden crosses (for the Christians); they forbade the repair or construction of churches and synagogues unless authorized by the Caliph in writing (today in Egypt this law applies, president Mubarak has to sign the order for any church repair or new construction). Non-Muslims who were not Dhimmis (i.e., "recognized") were given two options: convert or die. The effect of this is assimilation into Islamic culture to escape the harsh conditions. The language, customs and traditions of the assimilated culture are lost.

A telling example is the Chaldeans (not related to present-day Chaldeans, who are Catholic Assyrians). For millennia they were known as astronomers and astrologers in south Iraq; they were forcibly Islamized and Arabized, so rapidly that by 750 A.D. -- only 120 years after the coming of Islam -- they disappeared completely.

Muthuswamy: Let me start by acknowledging BetBasoo for a nice introduction.

The interaction of Islam with non-Muslims is an important, but a scantly discussed subject. Let me thank Jamie and Frontpage Magazine for choosing to address it through this symposium.

In his introduction, BetBasoo has distinguished Islam from other major religions, by pointing out convincingly “When Islam comes to dominate other cultures, those other cultures are often destroyed”. There is also a related one: extermination of non-Muslims and their expulsions when they couldn’t be subjugated. All of this points to conquest of non-Muslims and their land in the name of Islam. The revealing and distinguishing character of Islam is that this conquest is enduring even in the modern era.

Since I am originally from India, I can add some interesting tit bits to this symposium. During the Muslims rule in North India in the medieval period, just about all prominent Hindu temples were destroyed and mosques were erected in their place. To add insult to the injury, Jizya was imposed by several Muslim kings on the hapless Hindu masses. Ancient Hindu temples are now in South India , relatively untouched by the Muslim onslaught. Within the past sixty years portions of North India have now become Islamic Pakistan and Bangladesh , their non-Muslim populations decimated due to expulsions to what is now called India and resident Muslim populations increasingly Arabized.

If Mohammed had designed Islam to extend his power base and to conquer people and land, he couldn’t have envisioned a more enduring one. His cause has now become a religious one, taken over by the extended tribes of Saudis, non-Saudi Arab Muslims and non-Arab Muslims (in that order) subsequent to Mohammed’s death.

We ought to put entire Islamic scriptures and history, including the life Islam’s founder Mohammed under microscope. Propelled by data, the question of whether Islam is a religion or an ideology of conquest masquerading as a religion is no longer avoidable, however it might seem inconvenient.

Kasem: Islamic cultural genocide emanates straight from the Koran. Here are a few sample verses and their exegeses by eminent scholars of Islam.

In verse 5:50 Allah says that He will give His judgment about the days of ignorance. Ibn Kathir explains that this means whoever follows any laws other than the Koranic laws are unbelievers; they must be fought until they revert back to Islamic or Allah’s laws. Maulana Maududi (Tafaheem ul Quran, commentary 5/83), the founder of Jamate Islami, and the guru of the modern-day Islamists writes:

The word jahiliyah (literally 'ignorance') is used as an antonym to Islam. Islam is the way of 'ilm (true knowledge), since it is God Himself Who has shown this way, and His knowledge embraces everything. In contrast is the way that diverges from Islam - the path of Ignorance (jahiliyah). The pre-Islamic period in Arabia is designated as jahiliyah because this was the era when human beings derived their norms from either superstitious beliefs, conjectures and imagination or from their desires. Whenever such an attitude is adopted, it is bound to be designated as Ignorance. The appellation 'jahiliyah' will apply to every aspect of life which is developed in disregard of the knowledge made available by God, based only on man's partial knowledge blended with imagination, superstitious fancies, conjectures and desires.

Allah promises believers the sovereignty of the earth, and He will establish the authority of Allah’s chosen religion (Islam); disbelievers are miscreants…24:55

On the above verse (24:55) Ibn Kathir writes that Allah has made Muslims the leaders and rulers of mankind through whom He would reform the world and to whom people would submit, so that they would have in exchange a safe security after their fear.

Ibn Kathir and Maulana Maududi remove any confusion whatsoever about the mandatory nature of Islamic Cultural Genocide whenever Islam conquers a jahilia people. The history of the conquered people is the testimony to this command of Allah in verse 5:50, and 24:55.

The reason why Islam (or the Arabs) must perform a cultural genocide and impose Islamic (read Arabic) culture is also enshrined in the Koran.

In verse 3:104 we read that An Islamic (Arab) community is the community of righteous people. According to eminent writer Benjamin Walker this sura means Arabs are the best ever created (Walker, Foundations of Islam, p.170).

In verse 3:110 Allah says that the Arabs are the best of righteous people. According to ibn Kathir Muslims are the best nation because they bring the unbelievers tied in chains on their necks, that is, capture them in wars and later force them into Islam. Supporting ibn Kathir, Maulana Maududi (Tafaheem ul Quran, commentary number 3/88) writes that the Arabian Prophet (Muhammad, an Arab) and his followers are informed that they are being assigned the guidance and leadership of the world. The Muslims are charged with this responsibility because of their competence and high moral character. They have developed in theory and in practice the qualities essential for truly righteous leadership, namely the spirit and practical commitment to promoting good and suppressing evil and the acknowledgement of the One True God as their Lord and Master.

Here are a few verses where Allah considers the non-Muslims as deaf, dumb, and cattle.

An unbeliever (like an idol) is akin to a dumb (stupid) person and a burden to his master. (This verse institutionalizes Islamic slavery)…16:76

Following blindly forefather’s religion is parroting; they (the unbelievers) are like a goat-herd; deaf, dumb and blind (also see 2:18, 2:171, 6:25, 7:179, 8:22, 8:23, 22:46, 41:44, 46:26, 43:36-37…2:171.

Therefore, it is essential that the non-Muslims, when conquered by Islam, must undergo purification, culturally, to lift their status from animal to human. This should explain why Islam obliterates indigenous culture (read animal culture), replacing it with Arab culture. Islam elevates animals (non-Muslims) to human (only Muslims are humans) status through cultural genocide.

There are a number of ahadith where this supremacy of the Arabs is extolled. Here is a sample hadis:

Sahih Muslim, Book 030, Number 5653
Wathila b. al-Asqa' reported: I heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Verily Allah granted eminence to Kinana from amongst the descendants of Isma'il and he granted eminence to the Quraish amongst Kinana and he granted eminence to the Quraish amongst Banu Hashim and he granted me eminence from the tribe of Banu Hashim.

What Mr Muthusamy wrote about the annihilation of indigenous culture of India by the Arab/Islamist invaders is completely true. Being a native of Bangladesh I can vouch how Islam has insidiously made the conquered/converted people adapt to Arabic culture/tradition. Here are a few examples:

Many Muslims of Bangladesh hate local culture, preferring Arabic culture.

All Bengali Muslims must adapt Arabic names.

They prefer to cook/eat Islamic/Arabic/Persian food.

Many Bangladeshis take great pride in donning Arabic dress.

They must learn Arabic to recite the Koran.

The marriage/divorce and /or family laws are strictly based on Islamic/ Arabic system.

No law should contradict the Koran and Hadiths.

They must greet in Arabic, instead in Bengali.

Islamic education is compulsory for all Muslims.

Several decades ago China conducted the Cultural Revolution to propagate the proletariat culture. This was a cultural genocide of the Chinese people. Islam is similar to that.

In nutshell, Islamic cultural genocide disconnects the indigenous people from its past. They must obliterate their history, tradition, culture, and norms. They must erase their past pride, glory and heroism; they are now Arabs, even though the Arabs treat them inferior. These are the conquered people whom Islam/Arabism has purified off their animal status.

Roderick: The respondents have provided an excellent exegetical and historical summary of the negative impact that Islamization has had on indigenous cultures. Malise Ruthven, author of Islam in the World, has described Islam as “a religion programmed for victory.” He further observed, “Unlike Christianity, which learned to successfully survive without assimilation under non-Christian dominance, Islam historically has reacted stridently at the actual or perceived encroachment by non-Muslims into Islamic culture.” As it has been rightly noted by Peter BetBasoo, the impact of Islam upon on other cultures encompasses more than the supremacy of religious ideas, also political power. The fusion of the political and religious is inseparable. It may be argued that the religious element of Islam has been used historically to impose an Arab cultural imperialism to the demise of all others.

The two-world doctrine of dar al-Islam, the abode of peace where Islam rules, and dar al-harb, the abode of war, every place else, where the struggle must continue until Islam is triumphant, ideologically and politically inevitably undermines any potential for pluralism. The message of Islamic revivalists, who demand Muslims return to orthodoxy, appeals to those who desire greater Islamic hegemony rather than to the notion that Islam is one among many. The basic philosophical positions unavoidably involve conflict. Islam is not to be a blessing to the people of the world, but to rule the world through complete submission. Islamists employ the language of jihad rather than pluralism. The concept of cultural unity and political harmony has more to do with submission to Shar’ia than it does to promotion of mutual respect and co-existence.

The perception of non-Muslims as interlopers is a forceful idea that subtly enters into social/political realities. The term “interloper” infers illegitimacy. An interloper has no claim to the land, its laws, its culture, or even to its history. It is not long before the idea that the people, who are not Muslim do not belong, seep into actions that lead to the eradication of non-Muslims as viable populations in countries where they have become a minority. Lebanon is a perfect example of how Islamists successfully defended their claim for hegemonic dominance by demonizing the Christians of south Lebanon as outsiders that did not belong or have any legitimate claims to the land. The Islamists were able to aggressively dismantle the non-Muslim enclave and successfully consolidate their occupation of south Lebanon, as well as winning the argument of legitimacy on the world stage. This same process is occurring in Nigeria, Egypt, Indonesia, and Iraq.

The liberation of Iraq unleashed a chaos that surpasses criminality; it comes very close to the ethnic cleansing of non-Muslim minorities. Nearly 40% of the Iraqi Christians have left their homes as refugees in other countries. The Christian population at the beginning of the war numbered one million, today there are less than 600,000 Christians, and 25% of these are internally displaced within Iraq. On January 5, the Al Jihad and Unification Movement in Al Rafidain Land in Islamic State of Iraq, sent a letter to the Christian residents of Mosul warning them to leave or be massacred in three days. The next day, on the Feast of Epiphany, seven churches were bombed in coordinated attacks; three days later, another two churches were bombed. The last remaining Mandaean (followers of John the Baptist) family in the Alaza area of Kut was massacred on February 27, after repeated threats by Muslims to leave. A rocket fired into the family’s home killed 10 members of the family; the youngest child was only 18 months old. The Mandaeans have been so decimated in Iraq that the few remaining want only to escape in order to survive as a culture in the West. The Iraqi Jews, eight at last count, are making plans to leave.

Unfortunately, non-Muslim minorities, who are the real forces of moderation throughout the Muslim world, are diminishing. This reality speaks louder than the empty platitude of Islam as a religion of peace. The loss of vibrant non-Muslim cultures leaves a void that increasingly is being filled by extremists whose demand for orthodoxy will inevitably make life for the remaining Muslims intolerable.

Haidon: I would also like to extend my warm greetings the distinguished panellists here, particularly to Reverend Roderick and Mr. BetBasoo (whose work I am most familiar with) who are firsthand witnesses to the phenomenon we discuss here. I have little to add to the initial observations thus far. The examples of "cultural genocide" provided by the panellists are stark and harrowing. The travails of Christians in Iraq, and all over the Muslim world are real, and at an epidemic level. "Cultural genocide" however, need to not occur exclusively through violence. In many cases it takes place over time, and is much more subtle and surreptitious.

Mr. Kasem's analysis, while slightly simplistic, is not inaccurate. At the foundation of this notion of "Islamic cultural genocide" is traditional Islam. While I do not consider that the Qur'an specifically mandates "cultural genocide", the verses that affirm Muslim/Arab superiority and supremacy serve as an enabler to this notion of "cultural genocide". It provides the impetus. Building on the foundations of the Qur'an, the purported Muslim tradition as well as the hadith and sirah of Muhammad, serve as the real driver for this phenomenon. The hadith an d sira are replete of examples of Muhammad and his followers to vanquish and dispose of jahiliya. If necessary, I am more than glad to provide enumerable examples.

Unfortunately, the international human rights fraternity has been largely non-responsive aside from the work of a number of non-governmental organisations, who do not have the benefit of funding from the likes of George Soros. The political and operational bodies of the United Nations have similarly failed to take the lead in taking the lead in reporting and responding. Disturbingly, while international law has slowly began to recognise the collective rights of indigenous peoples (in addition to the individual rights of persons), we are beginning to see Arab and Muslim states in the United Nations system begin to assert collective rights, as a means to suppress non-Muslim minorities and to integrate sharia'ah and cultura l relativism into the human rights system. This will have the effect of marginalising the important work in international human rights law and will mean that non-Muslim minorities in Muslim countries will continue to languish.

BetBasoo: There are two points I would like to elaborate on. First, the point that Rev. Roderick makes about the inseparability of Islam the religion, Islam the State and Islam the Arab religion. Islam the state offers the complete and super package -- nothing can supersede it. Shari'a is the dominant law wherever Muslims rule. This forces non-Muslims into practices that may not be their own or may contradict their laws and customs, be they religious or civil. More significantly, it gives license to Muslims to eradicate non-Muslims and their cultures because they are not, as Kasem perceptively points out, thought to be the laws and customs of Allah -- they are jahiliyah, they are sacreligious. The second point that must be understood is that Islam, unlike Christianity, is a tribal, ethnic religion centered around Arabs, and controlled by Arabs, and it is used to project Arab culture on non-Arabs.

The second point I wish to elaborate on is Haidon's observation about enabling. It is difficult to see how suicide bombers can arise from Christian doctrine. There is nothing in the New Testament that even remotely hints at this idea. Indeed, Christian doctrine can be summed in two words: love and charity. The question is, why do Muslims engage in suicide bombings? Where does the idea come from? It is not explicitly stated in the Koran, to be sure, but the seeds of the idea are right there, in the more than 100 Koranic verses extolling Muslims to kill in the name of Allah. Suicide bombings are the device, and must not be confused with the message. I think the message was clearly articulated by Kasem, that non-Muslims and their cultures must be eradicated. How this is done is not germane to the argument -- it can be done by a suicide bomber or by the Jizya -- the effect is to destroy non-Muslims and their cultures.

A few years ago I was working on a project with three Indians from South India, one a Muslim and the other two Hindus. We entered into a religious discussion. I proposed the following scenario to the Muslim Indian. Imagine a country which is 95% Muslim and 5% Christian (Iraq comes to mind). Since we know that Islam bans the consumption of alcohol, I asked the Muslim what he would do were he in power, would he allow Christians to take wine every Sunday for communion? He answered without hesitation that he would not allow it because it is against Islam. I countered that they are Christians and this is demanded by their religion, and they are not subject to Islamic law. He said it did not matter, they would not be allowed and -- to add insult to injury -- if they did not like it they should leave the country. This person was not a great thinker, nor an Islamic scholar, nor a strategists, he was a Muslim Joe Schmoe.

So the question is, where did he learn to be so intolerant? Surely not from America (he had been here for four years). He was speaking from an Islamic point of view, and even at his common level of laity, these ideas were prevalent. The other two Indians, Hindus, angrily scolded him and most other Indian Muslims for rooting for Pakistan whenever India and Pakistan competed in soccer games -- showing that loyalty is not to the civil state, but to the Umma -- the Islamic nation.

There are many ways to be violent -- as 9/11 proved -- and they don't need to be spelled out in the Koran, but the seeds of that violence, the ideas that give rise to the violence, are right there in the Koran, which asserts the superiority of Arabs and their God Allah. In the past 1400 years, Islam has demonstrated that it consistently conquers and destroys non-Muslim cultures, using a variety of devices.

Muthuswamy: The evidence pointed out by distinguished colleagues here, one way or the other, suggests Islam as an ideology of conquest masquerading as a religion.

Operationally, much work is left to be done in undermining the ideology and holding its backers accountable. The later falls under the auspices of war on terror and in my view is outside the scope of this symposium.

As there has been much discussion about Islamic theology by the panelists, let me bring up an interesting perspective here.

In my view as a professional scientist, the so-called theological roots of this ideology can be effectively discredited through science. Science forms the proven basis of the modern era and importantly, is seen credible even by educated Muslims.

Within the doctrine consisting of the Koran, Hadith and Sira, the Koran plays a unique role – as it is said to consist of “revelations” from God. Without the Koran, there is no power of divinity in the doctrine.

From historical sources we know that the Koran was the first book of the Islamic Trilogy to be put together, and that was done several decades after the death of Mohammed. In a Hadith it is said that Koranic verses were collected from bits of bone, stone, parchment, date palm leaves, and also from the memories of those who had memorized it.

For something said to be as profound as God’s revelations, there shouldn’t be an iota of doubt about their authenticity. Clearly, leaves, stones, bits of bone, and people’s memory are not reliable or complete forms of note-taking or information storage when Mohammed allegedly delivered his revelations. This is common sense.

We can make a powerful assertion that available evidence makes the claim of associating these revelations in the Koran with God not scientifically credible.

Second point to be noted: Immersed in a rudimentary and often flawed understanding of nature, the tribes Mohammed belonged to were not well-placed to identify phoney messengers of God or falsehood.

Indeed, we can and we must discredit the standing of the Koran and Mohammed, the “Messenger” — and popularize the line of reasoning that Islam was likely deliberately designed to extend Mohammed’s powerbase and that of the extended tribes of Arabs beyond his time. As a result, Arab conquest and the continued genocide of non-Arabic cultures is only a natural consequence.

Kasem: I have already provided the theological foundation for the Islamic cultural genocide of indigenous people. As long as Muslims are motivated, guided, and commanded on these canonical provisions, there will be no letup on this fascistic domination of Arab/Islamic culture on people who are weaker, either militarily or financially.

To reinforce my point I shall request the doubters to visit a poor Muslim country such as Bangladesh and experience what Arab/oil money has done to its indigenous culture, norms and traditions, even to the extent of dress of the Bengali men and women. Just about twenty years ago, there was very little evidence of such cultural genocide. But with the oil/Arab money pouring in, Bangladesh it is slowly but surely turning into a ‘look like’ an Arab country.

Intelligent people will note that an Arab/Islamisation is on the way for the UN too. Very soon we might see the domination of the UN by the Islamists, thanks to the vast oil/Arab money. It is so easy to buy all the important people/ leaders of the UN through enormous gift/charity, offered in the name of Human Rights (read Islamic Human rights). It is a shame that the entire world is now under the threat of Islamic cultural genocide. The world is clearly polarised between Arab/Islamic block and the non-Arab/infidel block. Whether this might end in a cataclysmic victory of Islam or the triumph infidels will depend on how resolutely the non-Islamic world resists this lure of Arab/Islamic money.

Lastly, I have offered my honest assessment of the current situation vis-à-vis Islam/Arab supremacy and the infidel world. It is not meant to be racist or bigoted.

Roderick: Mr. Haidon makes an astute observation: violence is not the exclusive cause of cultural genocide. All too often we are blinded by the headlights of dramatic acts of terrorism and fail to even notice the transformation of society that is happening on a daily basis. The culture that has lost touch with its own foundations, whose energy and vibrancy has grown tired, gives way to the methodical demands for accommodation that gradually transforms society. Terrorism and micro-violence are tactics to destabilize and wear down culture. The notion of Islamic separatism, whether is appears as segregated class rooms, parallel Sharia-based courts and financial institutions, once established, mutates into a separate and unequal society. Institutional discrimination, intimidation and the erosion of personal rights soon follow. This is the force which prods along subtly and with greatest impact.

The Organization of Islamic Countries’ initiative, Resolution 7/19 on “Combating Defamation of Religions,” was adopted by the United Nations Human Rights Council on March 27. The resolution arose from the OIC’s ten-year action plan to move the UN to establish legal mechanism to combat Islamaphobia. The proponents argued that insulting the religious symbols of Islam should not be protected by freedom of expression. The resolution urged States to take action to prohibit the dissemination of racist and xenophobic ideas and material aimed at any religion or its followers that constituted incitement to racial and religious hatred, hostility or violence and encouraged States to provide adequate protection against acts of hatred, discrimination, and coercion resulting from defamation of religions. Delegates agreed that there must be a balance between free expression and acts that defame religions. This action signals a move from universal principles of human rights to the particularization of those rights; a shift from the universal recognition of the inherent dignity, equality and inalienable rights of all human beings individually, to the rights of groups. The resolution is a product of the group politic that has metastasized in the United Nations. Unfortunately, it sets a dangerous precedent that Islamists will use to undermine the essential foundation of western civilization, freedom.

Mr. Kasem points to the 800 pound gorilla in the room, and, perhaps the most potent element in the recent success of the Islamization of Muslim countries and non-Muslim countries, Arab/oil money. Saudi Arabia is the only country in the world that has infused religious proselytization into its foreign policy. Over the past 30 years it has spent nearly 100 billion dollars promoting and supporting Wahhabi Islamic institutions around the world. The economic and security interests of the West make it beholden to Arab oil, thereby fueling the very entity that threatens its survival as a viable culture. The failure to seriously consider the role of religion in foreign policy, especially that of Islamic countries, has made the West nearly impotent in protesting the erosion of social discrimination and abuse of religious minorities in Muslim dominant countries.

According to the State Department report on International Religious Freedom, nine out of the 18 countries of the Near East and North Africa region have regressed in terms of protecting religious minorities from social problems and discrimination. There was no measurable progress in the remaining nine countries. From the perspective of the religious minorities, the West appears to play the role of a passive onlooker as their cultural genocide continues unabated.

Haidon: This symposium has served as a useful exercise in problem identification. All of the participants have raised important and valid points, particularly Mr Kasem for his overview of Islamic history and jurisprudence. Again, while I do not believe that the Qur'an mandates cultural genocide, I acknowledge that it is invoked by radical Muslims and Islamists to justify it. While myself, and other Muslims "reformers" advocate a markedly different approach to interpreting Islam that challenges conventional interpretation, these views are outside the realm of mainstream Islamic thought, and reside in the periphery. Until they become more integrated with mainstream Islamic thought, I cannot in good conscience argue that these views are relevant to the immediate issue. Mr BetBasso's point about Christian doctrine and jurisprudence is well taken. Any attempt at equating Islam and Christianity in this regard is farcical.

Rev. Roderick provides insightful and timely examples of the increasing role Islamism plays in international institutions. The actions of the OIC are an excellent example of the influence Islamists are wielding at the international level, as are the corresponding reactions and capitulations by UN states. The United Nation's primary human rights bodies are also playing a role in this capitulation by seeking to suppress legitimate criticisms of radical Islam, in the guise of fighting "religious vilification". The emergence of "lawful Islamism" and broader moves for legal exceptionalism and accommodation for Islam (without corresponding reciprocity) are growing problems in the West, and brings to mind the "boiling frog" analogy. While Islamist aggression manifested through physical violence will always be more visible, it is the more stealth and legal Islamism that seeks to effectuate change through Western institutions that is emerging as the silent enabler.

FP: Rev. Keith Roderick, Peter BetBasoo, Abul Kasem, Thomas Haidon and Dr. Mutthuswamy, thank you for joining Frontpage Symposium.

Jamie Glazov is Frontpage Magazine's editor. He holds a Ph.D. in History with a specialty in Russian, U.S. and Canadian foreign policy. He is the author of Canadian Policy Toward Khrushchev’s Soviet Union and is the co-editor (with David Horowitz) of The Hate America Left. He edited and wrote the introduction to David Horowitz’s Left Illusions. His new book is United in Hate: The Left's Romance with Tyranny and Terror. To see his previous symposiums, interviews and articles Click Here. Email him at jglazov@rogers.com.

We have implemented a new commenting system. To use it you must login/register with disqus. Registering is simple and can be done while posting this comment itself. Please contact gzenone [at] horowitzfreedomcenter.org if you have any difficulties.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Home | Blog | Horowitz | Archives | Columnists | Search | Store | Links | CSPC | Contact | Advertise with Us | Privacy Policy

Copyright©2007 FrontPageMagazine.com