"Islamophobia" - A Crime Against Humanity

Ibrahim Kalin

You may be interested in an article that appears at the Arab website Asharq Alawsat, by Ibrahim Kalin, senior adviser to Turkish premier Recep Tayyib Erdogan. Kalin warns the West about the dangers of "Islamophobia" and proposes that it be designated a crime against humanity. 

This was bound to happen. The massacre in Norway has been a boon to Arab and pro-Muslim activists. And the Gayssot Law, in France, that criminalizes holocaust denial, racist speech and discriminatory actions, will soon be invoked again in defense of Muslims. Thus, anyone critical of Islam or of immigration could be guilty of a crime against humanity. 

He uses perfectly logical reasoning. But logic and truth are two different things: 

Some commentators are trying to present Breivik as an isolated case of one person’s insanity. But this is totally false. Breivik is a result of something larger and more dangerous than one deranged person’s bloody act. The Islamophobic network from which Breivik derived his ideas and action extend from the US Islamophobes such as Robert Spencer, Bat Ye’or and their colleagues to racist European political groups. This network of individuals and underground groups should now be exposed and investigated. Their potential danger should be clear to everyone now. It cannot be seen as one sad isolated incident. 

The case of Fjordman, I fear, is only the beginning. 

Phobia? The wrong term to use...

I find it hard to think of westerners concerned with Islamism as "Islamophobic".  All of them are hardly "phobic" of Islam, - on the contrary, most of them are quite outspoken and brave in talking about something others shy away from.  

I myself do not have a fear of Islam at all. Disdain, yes, lack-of-interest, yes, but certainly no fear.  I've studied it, I've even read the Koran once, - and was totally unimpressed.  I just don't feel a need to respect something I find lacking.  That is not phobia, and no amount of information or "re-education" will make me think otherwise.


To compare so called islamophobia with Holocaust denial is rather disrespectful. It appears that this man cannot tell the difference between exterminationist rhetoric and rejection of his oppressive ideology.

kapperwocky #2

1)  Let's quote Kappert again:

..."It is very plausible that the extreme-right wants to label all terrorists as 'madmen' and mostly 'individuals'. Of course they know that they are wrong..."

When Marcfrans points out that Kappert thinks that either the extreme right or terrorists "know that they are wrong", on the basis of the above quote, how does Kappert respond?  Does he try to explain himself?  Does he recogize the mistake he made?  Of course not!  He reponds with 6 dfferent statements wich hAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE POINT MADE.  

Conclusion 1:  Kappert is INcapable of taking responsibility for his own statements.   In that respect he is not much different from those hooligans - euh "unsatisfied people" - in London and elsewhere   

2) Let the record show that Kappert considers the following notion, i.e. that a culture should emphasize personal responsability for one's own welfare, as an "elitist approach".

Conclusion 2:  Kappert has no longer - if he ever had - any elementary understanding of human morality.  If you take away the concept of personal responsibility for one's own actions, you have descended to the level of 'the jungle', or the nazis, or Saddam, or Fidel, etc.... In short, Kappert adheres to a jungle morality (perhaps for animals?), but certainly not one for humans with a 'free will' or a 'conscience'.      

for grumpy

Most TBJ comments claim that the Norwegian Rambo was a single, lunatic act of violence, and deny any link to the hate pamphlets delivered by islamophobists ('fjordman, Wilders & Co.). Sadly, they are not aware (or don't want to know) of networks like the ORG, managed by the Dansk Folkeparti (Jesper Nielsen), or Nürnberg 2.0 (Michael Mannheimer), inciting a weird mixture of extreme-right lifestyle, Wehrsportgruppen and anti-islamism, trying to infiltrate their members into security forces and political structures. They stand in conexion with military and police, media and economy. Their language evokes very bad memories. For your appraisal: one aim of Nürnberg 2.0 is the "Aufbau einer Erfassungsstelle zur Dokumentation der systematischen und rechtswidrigen Islamisierung Deutschlands und der Straftaten linker Faschisten zur Unterdrückung des Volkes". At the end of the Nürnberger Prozesse 2.0 will be proclaimed 'the liberation of the Volk with merciless processes against today's criminals of the orderly tribunals of the German Reich.' So much for the 'moral values' of the right and individual responsability.

Probably you will answer that these folks are 'isolated individuals' and continue in your wishful thinking - until the next Rambo. Or you will find some sentence and return another grumpy finickiness comment. Thanks for your attention, anyway.

PS: to capodistrias: please, don't spend your time on me.


Right is wrong.

Kappert's Alpha principle.

Wrong is Right.

Kappert's Omega principle.

And Rambo becomes a Terrorist,

Because Kappert is a pseudonymist.*


*Pseudonymist - individual who pseudomizes others.

gettting fooled # 2

Clearly, kappert is "getting fooled" again. This time, by the rather unsatisfactory comments of GMQ and by Kappert's own confused response to them.  To illustrate with 2 simple examples:

- K claims that..."Of course, they know that they are wrong".  By "they" he could mean the "extreme right" or individual terrorists.  Either way, the notion that they would "know" that they are wrong, is laughable on its face.  That won't stop kappert asserting such nonsense.

-K calls hooligans "unsatisfied people".  Apparently, he objects to designating people wo behave like hooligans as "hooligans".  Speaking of "head in the sand"!    In K's mind, having "basic social/civil needs", and/or being dissatisfied or "unsatisfied", justifies hooliganism.

But. let's give kappert his due.  He does know slogans (like "people can get fooled for a long time, but it has a price"), but he cannot apply them appropriately in the real world.   After all, Norway is a perfect example of Kappert's "preventive and social approach", but it manifestly is not bringing social peace to Norway.  Only a common purpose, as reflected in broad adherence to a common culture, with emphasis on personal responsibility for one's own welfare, can do that.    

the twister

- The right is wrong to label 'terrorists' as 'lunatic individuals', see Bush jr. q.e.d.

- the right is wrong to label unsatisfied citizens as 'hooligans', 'mob' and 'rioters'.

- Anyone who uses a pseudonym has something to hide or is afraid of consequences.

- Today's politicians know little or nothing about social/civil needs of their population. The gap between 'politics' and 'people' is the unquestionable result.

- Norway's welfare-state received the same fate as other welfare-states after 1989. The violence of terrorists in Norway is so far limited to the far-right Rambo. It seems to be a problem of civic education and hazardous demagogy.

-As always, marcfrans does not give a clue of solution. His attempt to proclaim a 'common purpose' in a 'common culture' in which individuals must care for their own welfare, is at least weird. How can there be a fanfare for the common man, if each individual has to fight for his own welfare. A more elitist approach than marcfrans' is hardly imaginable.

getting fooled

It is very plausible that the extreme-right wants to label all terrorists as 'madmen' and mostly 'individuals'. Of course they know that they are wrong, if not, what was the fuzz about 'war on terror' and 'al-Qaida', if terrorists are merely 'lunatic individuals'.
Several times attention was called upon the consequences of hate inciting writings, as prolifered by 'fjordman', Wilders and company. If these authors duck and cover with their heads in the sand, denying that their thesis incite violence against minorities, they are as 'mad' as they want the world's Rambos to be.
Now, as usual, the right-wing is calling for severe (re)action, declassifying unsatified people as hooligans. It would be an interesting experiment if any candidate for parliament would live some months in a 'dangerous neighbourhood' to learn about the basic social/civil needs of his/her voters. But that's utopic, as the arrogant elites never will have such a humble attitude.
If the author of the text above laments 50 Mio USD on newspapers (not all leftist, as I understand), integration and inclusion badly spend, I wonder what he would be in favour for? Christmas illumination (grabs more than 50 M in Norway), Pathfinder's summernightcamps and jumps over fire on 21st June? Bible lessons in kindergarden? Monocultural lobby groups? I hope you detect the irony in my words, but I'm still waiting for a preventive and social approach from the right-wing parties. In politics, people can get fooled for a long time, but it has a price.

Islamophobia - a new rhetoric tool for the left

The madman striking in Norway on the 22 july is used to smear everyone asking questions about mass immigration and profliferation of islamic identities in Europe.  

There are two important things that have come out of the 22. july catasthrope:  

Firstly our security and intelligence forces have to open another chapter in their activities and look for hooligans not only from the islamist circles.  

Secondly insight was gained that terrorists are individuals, in this case a socalled christian terrorist and that muslim terrorists are individuals too. Meaning that not all muslims are terrorists. Nothing new in that you might say, but the rethoric has overwhelmingly blaimed the whole muslim community for the bad actions of the few.  Well, we who are Islamocritic will adjust to more precise targets and maybe find new allies in the enlightened moderate majority of muslims.

The worst that came out of the 22. july is that it gave a huge energy impulse to the subsidised marxist oriented media community of Norway.  Everyone who has been looking at a blog that the terrorist has looked at, is a suspect.  A handful of public known islamocritics are being chased and smeared in a hefty barrage of criticism, mostly completely without justification.

It is worth noting that in Norway some 300 m NOK (approx 50 m USD) are yearly unvoluntary subsidies from taxpayers to newspapers, mostly leftist; substantial sums of the same nature are distributed to a variety of multicultural lobby groups.

One of these, Antirasistisk Senter, (Antiracist Center) employs fifteen people and is sponsored by the leftist minister for Integration and Inclusion (what a name for a department...).

The good thing is, that in spite of this barrage of money and "journalism" hailing the multicultural heaven, there is a urge in the population to discuss these matters without the noise from the marxist camp.  

The word Islamophob is the marxist camp's new slogan for racism, as racism became unuseful because it was evidently missing the mark.  I wonder how long it will take before we get rid of the new silly construction