Showing posts with label islamisering. Show all posts
Showing posts with label islamisering. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 17, 2013

Islamisation hysteria over gender seating at "speaking function" in the UK.

 There is a hate-inspired ruckus in the UK over demand of a hypothetical, orthodox Islamic speaker to "have his audience in a university lecture hall segregated by gender." You may read about this at the link above and provided [here - here] Those that promote Islamophobia and the Islamisation myth have likened this prospect of a gender segregated audience for a single speaker to South African Apartheid and the institution of segregation of black Americans in the American South.  These comparisons are outrageous given that this gender segregation was to be for one or a few hypothetical speakers at a public university -- while both South African Apartheid and racial segregation in the South were real institutionalized practices of inequality and dehumanization, often characterized by violence against the oppressed group.

 How are seating arrangements devaluing and dehumanizing one or both genders?

When asked the question about how gender segregation for a hypothetical single program means that some audience members are viewed as "less than" because of seating arrangements - the opponents on various forums simply could not answer. Most of the replies were based on the Islamification myth and the notion that Muslims are trying to take over the West (with help from the "godless" political left) and destroy Western Christian civilization and bring about some kind of a "global caliphate". A hypothetical Islamic "speaker" and his "demand" for gender seperation is yet another example of the "advancement of sharia law." The "imposition of sharia law on society" is a  part of the larger Islamisation mythology.  This stuff is very much, well, crackpot, and there are naive, very misinformed people are out there fighting something (Islamisation) that is not happening or occurring. This type of moral panic is (ab)used by deviant political actors (Geert Wilders and his PVV) to compromise the religious freedom of Muslims living in European countries. If anything, the growing institutional prejudice, discriminatory legislation, counter-terrorism practices and lack of equal protections of the laws are setting up an apartheid for Muslims living in Europe.

Reality check on the "apartheid" of the "gender segregation" hysteria. Some gender segregation is permitted for a religious group conducting a religious service. It is not permissible to gender segregate a lecture hall in a public university in a manner that implies inequality, and it should not be allowed, but it's possible and acceptable if there is NO implication of gender inequality. The gender separation could also be in the context of the program. The legality is determined on a case by case basis. That's a good balance, so comparisons to institutionalized oppression in South Africa and the American South are utterly outrageous, shameful, and should be apologized for by those abusing and cheapening the horrors of racial oppression. Here's a view from the Guardian about what is actually permissible:
It took the example of an ultra-orthodox religious group invited to speak as part of a wider series of talks on faith, where the speaker requested the audience be segregated by gender. The guidance says that if, for example, women and men were seated separately side by side rather than men at the front and women at the back there would not necessarily be any gender inequality, and voluntary segregation could be permitted (emphasis mine -The Guardian, 13 December 2013). 

What made racial segregation evil was that the "separate but equal" accommodation (Plessy v Ferguson,  1898) was not at all equal (Brown v. Board of Education, 1954), but institutionalized practices of inequality and dehumanization, often characterized by violence against the oppressed group..  Again - this is about promoting the myth of Islamisation and getting people emotional about something that is not happening or occurring...There can be NO simplistic comparisons between the evil and appalling institution of segregation in the American South and seating arrangements for a hypothetical  program - where the opponents cannot demonstrate how one gender is devalued and dehumanized to the extent of systematic dehumanization of black people in the American South.

What we need to watch closely now is if there is an attempt to now take this hysteria and use it to interfere with the religious practices of any religious group that has gender based religious practices, which also includes Christian faiths. Some of these hate groups that feed off of media attention to promote Islamophobia have been using the "sharia law threat" myth to try and interfere with religious practices of Muslims in their own communities. We must stop them from further interference in religious freedoms!

Well, in the end, we know what this hysteria is about ... promoting the myth of "Islamisation" ... getting people to fight something that's not occurring and will not happen. We know...this is "creeping sharia" and the "coming of the long Eurabian night" and, well, you all know the rest of the rubbish...xD

Saturday, December 8, 2012

Geert brings Hank and Ingrid to roost in America.

I have always advocated keeping Geert Wilders out of our country. In fact, Wilders should be keep out of all civilized and democratic countries for the sake of internal security. Since about 2009, Wilders has been making frequent trips to the US and Canada for "speaking engagements" , and this includes at the site of the World Trade Center, where on September 11, 2010, Wilders gave yet another Islamophobic hate speech. At this time, the new Dutch government had not been seated from the June election results. At that time also, the "Ground Zero mosque" (called the "Victory Mosque" by Wilders) issue was ignited and Geert Wilders was brought over by Pamela Geller and her hateful associates. Also following Wilders to New York was the Dutch newsmedia and the view of tying this trip and hate speech to a new cabinet and governemnt was repugnant and shameful!

Beating up Muslims in the streets in the Netherlands and America. The far and wide coverage of Wilders' travels and hatespeeches may be causing a spike in anti-Muslim hate crimes in especially the US.

Henk and Ingrid, Mr. and Mrs Dutch (sic), was a creation of Wilders to further his campaign of hate against especially Muslims and Moroccans. This last July, a real life Henk and Ingrid in the town of Almelo beat an elderly Turkish neighbor on the street. Aziz Kara eventually died of his head injuries. The shock of this murder also rippled through the Tweede Kamer (House) election campaign and was one of the factors that thankfully set back Wilders.
Let us hope that the Dutch people can wake up and see that Geert Wilders is not "patriotic" and that this type of speech is unacceptable and dangerous to society.  Wilders is actually anti-Dutch and opposed to his own country's proud history of religious tolerance just as much as Pim Fortuyn was. Like Fortuyn, Wilders promotes and advocates for hate of other Dutch people based on their religious faith, which is contrary to what the Dutch nation actually stands for!

In New York we have  Muslim men almost killed on the street after being asked if they were Muslim. In August 2010, about two weeks before Wilders hatespeech in New York, a cab driver  was viciously slashed and stabbed by a passenger after he was asked if he was Muslim.   On November 24 of this year, a 72-year-old grandfather almost ended up like Aziz Kara, beaten almost to death in the streets of Queens, New York. The men savagely beat this well-liked grandfather after he answered that he was, indeed, a Muslim. This follows the stabbing of another man outside of a Queens mosque on November 19. The victim was called anti-Muslim slurs as he was being punched and stabbed.  Some are willing to act based upon their hate of Muslims, like hate that is promoted by Geert Wilders.
---















 Rather than be a great shame for the Dutch people, rather than spit on the grave of William of Orange, rather than a sledgehammer to the great nation the Dutch people have built for 450 years - suffered, shed blood and died for - Geert Wilders's "Victory Mosque" hatespeech on September 11, 2010 was viewed as some sort of statement on a new Dutch government in 2010 (especially the second video) by the Dutch newsmedia. This was repugnant and every patriotic Dutchman should have been upset! 

 ----

Anti-Muslim "free speech" and spike of anti-Muslim hate crimes.  This situation has been further aggravated by Wilders' acquittal on hate speech charges last year. Hate speech has consequences and one of these consequences is that some people will act on hateful messages partly promoted by Geert Wilders' trips to the US since 2009. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, anti-Muslim hate crimes in 2010 were 50% higher than than the previous year - and the SPLC cites the hate built up around the "Ground Zero mosque" protest, which Geert Wilders as a key speaker at.  As Hansdeep Singh and Simran Jeet Singh at the Daily Beast point out - these attacks have not declined a decade after the 9-11 attacks - but have gone up - and I would contend, especially after 2009, the year that Geert Wilders began most of his trips to North America (emphasis mine):
 For example, from 2005 to 2010, hate crimes motivated by religious bias show a consistent upward trajectory—whereas hate crimes against religious communities constituted 17.1 percent of all bias-based crimes in 2005, that number has reached 20 percent in the most recent report published in 2010. This is the highest rate of hate crimes motivated by religious bias in the 18 years since the FBI started tracking hate crimes nationwide in 1992.

Furthermore, while one might assume that the pattern of anti-Muslim violence would have decreased a decade after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, official statistics show that hate crimes against Muslims are at their highest levels since 2001. The most recent FBI data indicates that in a one-year period, from 2009 to 2010, there was a staggering 42 percent increase in hate crimes against Muslims in this country.
Here's what we should do: Send the 72 year-old grandfather's medical bills (and the medical bills of other hate crime victims) to the Dutch government. In the future, send the Dutch government your medical bills, property damage bills and other expenses that are probably a result of allowing Geert Wilders to travel about teaching people to hate Muslims in North America. The spike in hate crimes against Muslims appears to coincide with both the "Victory Mosque" hate campaign and Geert Wilders' own travels to North America. This problem was created in the Netherlands long before the September 11, 2001 attacks (Rotterdam, 1991), fueled today by the anti-Muslim counter-terrorism industry - and somewhere along the line a message needs to be sent to the Dutch governemnt that it is their responsibility to clean up this mess!  Take this hateful poison back to Rotterdam - where it came from!

Crossposted from Burning Tulips: Have Henk and Ingrid moved to New York?

Thursday, April 19, 2012

Breivik in court: The real threat to freedom, democracy and security

[caption id="attachment_98" align="alignleft" width="300" caption="Wilders: The one who radicalized Breivik?!"][/caption]

Bare naked Islamophobia is anti-democratic and anti-freedom. Those that espouse Islamophobia actually oppose the freedoms and civilization they claim to be defending and fighting for.  To want to ban Islamic practice, deport people based on their religious faith, and punish and sanction people for their political views are as anti-freedom and anti-democratic as it gets. For all their accusations that "Islam is uncivilized and backwards," the fact is that the "new" violent Islamophobia of the "new Crusaders" is every bit as uncivilized and backward.  On top of that, we get the promotion of myths about Muslims in Europe, "they are invading," "they are imposing," as if "Muslims" are non-humans robots that all think the same.  Also regarded as "enemy" is the political Left that is viewed as "enabling  Islamisation" and "wanting to destroy Western Christian civilization."  This also implies that the political Left is a monolithic enemy to "western Christian civilization."  The component of "poisonous multiculturalism" comes to us out of the Dutch Islamophobia of Pim Fortuyn and some of Breivik's other accusations come out of the most radicalized individual in the Western world: Geert Wilders .

Like the majority that believe in the Islamisation myth, Anders Behring Breivik regards  "Muslims and Leftist enablers" as non-human beings and "enemies of his nation." He claims "self defense" because he is a kind of soldier defending his country. Soldiers are never prosecuting for killing in battle. Never mind the fact that the victims who were shot at point blank range with explosive ammunition had fathers, mothers, and families, these political opponets were "enemies of Norway." Anders Behring Breivik does not see the Norwegian court as legitimate because it is of the"multicultural political system," perhaps meaning that a Muslim would be regarded as just as equal before the law as he and the democratic political system is what created the laws that he now is being tried under. Anders Behring Breivik hates his own country.

Anders Behring Breivik actually hates Western civilization and his own country, as do all of those who hate the idea that Western democracy allows Muslims religious and political freedom. Here in lies the aspect of the "new" anti-Muslim, "Crusader" terrorism that is anti-freedom, anti-democratic and anti-Western civilization.  Not only does Anders Behring Breivik feel his victims are not human beings, but the vision held by him and the majority of Muslim haters (espically Geert Wilders) is one that seeks to destroy the liberal democratic order  that Western civilization has built:  religious freedom, equality before the law, free speech and expression, political freedom and political systems where political opponents are respected and challenged, not shot dead. Those who claim to be defending Western civilization and want to outlaw the practice of Islam, criminalize the political Left, deport and strip citizenship of millions of people based on their religious faith are actually quite opposed themselves to Western civilization and what it has given the world. Anders Behring Breivik and those who identify with his message are actully a vastly greater threat to Western civilization than the handful of phantom "Islamists and jihadists" alleged by European security services and actually hate their own countries, as well as Western civilization itself.

What we also need to know is: Who and what radicalized Breivik to hate his country and civilization so much to kill almost 80 people?!

[youtube id="lGwRKY0NzKM" w="250" h="200"] [youtube id="AuzLB_Ddc2o" w="250" h="200"]

Bare naked islamofobie is anti-democratisch en anti-vrijheid. Degenen die islamofobie aanhangen eigenlijk tegen de vrijheden en de beschaving die zij zeggen te verdedigen en vechten voor. Te willen islamitische praktijk te verbieden, te deporteren mensen op basis van hun religieuze geloof, en te bestraffen en te bestraffen mensen voor hun politieke opvattingen zijn als anti-vrijheid en anti-democratische als het maar kan. Voor al hun beschuldigingen dat "de islam is onbeschaafd en naar achteren," het is een feit dat de "nieuwe" gewelddadige islamofobie van de "nieuwe kruisvaarders" is net zo onbeschaafd en achterlijk. Bovendien hebben we de bevordering van mythes over moslims in Europa te krijgen, "ze plegen een invasie", "ze zijn imposante," alsof "moslims" zijn niet-mensen robots die denken allemaal hetzelfde. Ook als "vijand" is de politiek links dat wordt gezien als "mogelijk islamisering" en "willen westerse christelijke beschaving te vernietigen." Dit betekent ook dat de politieke Links is een monolithische vijand van "westerse christelijke beschaving." De component van 'giftige multiculturalisme "komt bij ons uit de Nederlandse islamofobie op Pim Fortuyn en een aantal andere beschuldigingen Breivik's komen uit de meest geradicaliseerde persoon in de Westerse wereld: Geert Wilders.

Net als de meerderheid die geloven in de mythe islamisering, Anders Behring Breivik aanzien van "moslims en linkse enablers" als niet-menselijke wezens en "vijanden van zijn natie." Hij beweert dat "zelfverdediging", want hij is een soort soldaat verdediging van zijn land. Soldaten worden nooit vervolgen voor het doden in de strijd. Vergeet het feit dat de slachtoffers die bij punt lege waaier gemaakt met explosieve munitie vaders, moeders en families hadden, deze politieke opponets waren "vijanden van Noorwegen." Anders Behring Breivik heeft de Noorse rechter niet als legitiem, omdat het van het "multiculturele politieke systeem," misschien betekent dat een moslim zou worden beschouwd als even gelijk voor de wet als hij en het democratische politieke systeem is wat gemaakt de wetten die hij nu wordt geprobeerd onder.  Anders Behring Breivik heeft een hekel aan zijn eigen land.

Anders Behring Breivik haat eigenlijk de westerse beschaving en zijn eigen land, net als al diegenen die haten het idee dat de westerse democratie moslims religieuze en politieke vrijheid mogelijk maakt. Hier in ligt het aspect van de "nieuwe" anti-moslim, "Crusader" terrorisme dat is anti-vrijheid, anti-democratische en anti-westerse beschaving. Niet alleen Anders Behring Breivik voel zijn slachtoffers zijn geen menselijke wezens, maar de visie in het bezit van hem en de meerderheid van de moslim haters (espically Geert Wilders) is er een die wil de liberaal democratische orde te vernietigen dat de westerse beschaving gebouwd heeft: de vrijheid van godsdienst, gelijkheid voor de wet, vrijheid van meningsuiting en expressie, politieke vrijheid en politieke systemen waar politieke tegenstanders worden gerespecteerd en uitgedaagd, niet doodgeschoten. Degenen die beweren dat de verdediging van de westerse beschaving en willen verbieden de praktijk van de islam, strafbaar politiek links, deporteren en strippen burgerschap van miljoenen mensen op basis van hun geloof zijn eigenlijk best tegen zich aan de westerse beschaving en wat het heeft de wereld . Anders Behring Breivik en degenen die zich identificeren met zijn boodschap zijn actully een veel grotere bedreiging voor de Westerse beschaving dan de handvol fantoom "islamisten en jihadisten" beweerd door Europese veiligheidsdiensten en eigenlijk haten hun eigen landen, maar ook de westerse beschaving zelf.

Wat we ook weten is: Wie en wat geradicaliseerd Breivik naar zijn land en de beschaving zo veel tot bijna 80 mensen te doden haten?!

Anders Behring Breivik, Norway Mass Killer, Claims 'Self Defense' As Trial Begins