Tuesday, October 19, 2010

OIC and the Modern Caliphate; the West ‘has little chance of survival’.

By Bat Ye'or

The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) is a religious and political organization. Close to the Muslim World League of the Muslim Brotherhood, it shares the Brotherhood's strategic and cultural vision: that of a universal religious community, the Ummah, based upon the Koran, the Sunna, and the canonical orthodoxy of shari'a. The OIC represents 56 countries and the Palestinian Authority (considered a state), the whole constituting the universal Ummah with a community of more than one billion three to six hundred million Muslims.

The OIC has a unique structure among nations and human societies. The Vatican and the various churches are de facto devoid of political power, even if they take part in politics, because in Christianity, as in Judaism, the religious and political functions have to be separated. Asian religions, too, do not represent systems that bring together religion, strategy, politics, and law within a single organizational structure.

Not only does the OIC enjoy unlimited power through the union and cohesion of all its bodies, but also to this it adds the infallibility conferred by religion. Bringing together 56 countries, including some of the richest in the world, it controls the lion's share of global energy resources. The European Union (EU), far from anticipating the problems caused by such a concentration of power and investing in the diversification and autonomy of energy sources since 1973, acted to weaken America internationally in order to substitute for it the U.N., the OIC's docile agent. In the hope of garnering a few crumbs of influence, the EU privileged a massive Muslim immigration into Europe, paid billions to the Mediterranean Union and Palestinian Authority, weakened the European states, undermined their unity, and wrapped itself in the flag of Palestinian justice, as though this would supply some protective system against the global jihad, which it endeavored to focus on Israel.

Religion as the main aspect of the OIC emerges from its language and its targets. It seems that the OIC is restoring in the 21st century the Caliphate, the supreme controlling body for all Muslims. In their Charter (2008), Member States confirm that their union and solidarity are inspired by Islamic values. They affirm their aim to reinforce within the international arena their shared interests and the promotion of Islamic values. They commit themselves to revitalizing the pioneering role of Islam in the world, increasing the prosperity of the member states, and -- in contrast to to the European states -- to ensure the defense of their national sovereignty and territorial integrity. They proclaim their support for Palestine with al-Quds Al Sharif, the Arabized name for Jerusalem, as its capital, and exhort each other to promote human rights, basic freedoms, the state of law (shari'a), and democracy according to their constitutional and legal system -- in other words, compliance with shari'a.

They also undertake to stimulate noble Muslim values, to preserve their symbols and their shared heritage, and to defend the universality of the Islamic religion -- simply put, the universal propagation of Islam (da'wa). They state that they are promoting women's rights and encourage their active participation in all walks of life, in accordance with the laws of the Member States. They agree to inculcate Muslim children with Islamic values and to support Muslim minorities and communities outside the Member States in order to preserve their dignity and their cultural and religious identity.

The Charter's strategic targets seek "[t]o ensure active participation of the Member States [of the OIC] in the global political, economic and social decision-making processes to secure their common interests" (I-5) and "[t]o promote and defend unified position on issues of common interest in international forums" (1-17).

Among its targets, the OIC Charter specifies the propagation, promotion, and preservation of Islamic teachings and values, the spread of Islamic culture, and the preservation of the Islamic heritage (I-11). Article I-12 promotes the protection and defense of the true image of Islam, the fight against its defamation, and the encouragement of dialogue between civilizations and religions. The other objectives deal with protecting inherent Islamic family values (I-14) and the preservation of rights, dignity, and religious and cultural identity of the Muslim communities and minorities in non-Member States (I-16). This issue points to the OIC authority over immigrants abroad and its pressure on the governments of the non-Muslim host countries through the channel of dialogue, including the Alliance of Civilizations, whose Report backs OIC programs, and interfaith and immigration networks.

The OIC supports all the jihadist movements considered to be resisting "foreign occupation," including those in "occupied" Indian Kashmir, and condemns the "humiliation and oppression" of Muslims in India.

The Charter stipulates that the International Islamic Court of Justice shall become the Organization's main legal body (Chap. X, Art. 14) and that "[t]he Independent Permanent Commission on Human Rights shall promote the civil, political, social and economic rights enshrined in the organization's [OIC] covenants and declarations and in universally agreed human rights instruments, in conformity with Islamic values" (Art. 15). It implies that the covenants which do not conform with Islamic values will not be followed.

One can note that Sudanese President Omar al Bashir, accused (according to Western criteria of justice) of genocide committed in southern Sudan and Darfur, has not been troubled by the Islamic Court of Justice. His colleagues at the OIC do not consider him in any way a criminal and receive him with great respect, as does Turkish PM Erdogan.

The Islamic Court of Justice has an international mandate and could try foreigners, both Muslims and non-Muslims (blasphemers, apostates, resisters to jihad) who have broken the laws of shari'a anywhere. Moreover, the claim by the OIC to be the guardian and protector of Muslim immigrants living in all countries that are not members of the OIC implies an extension of its jurisdiction and political influence over all the Muslims of Europe, North and South America, and the other non-Member States. This situation exacerbates the danger incurred by non-religious European Muslims, whether atheists, apostates, or free thinkers.       

Within its organization, the Charter presents characteristics similar to those of the EU; however, in terms of its spirit, functions, principles, and objectives, it is the EU's very antithesis. Even if it employs the language of international organizations, the meaning of the words is different by their being rooted in the conceptual world of the Koran, which contradicts the basis of secular Western thought. Thus, Article 32-2 states, "The Council of Foreign Ministers [of OIC countries] shall recommend the rules of procedures of the Islamic Summit." This implies an Islamic view and understanding on policy.

Such a combined political and religious institution is at the very outer rim of Western thinking, anchored as it is in the separation between politics and religion. Even if interference between the two fields has persisted, the principle of such separation has facilitated emancipation in the intellectual and political arenas from religious authority and the development of critical thought.

Present-day aspiration of the Ummah to submit to a caliphate which embodies a combined political-religious institution can only surprise the Westerner and highlight the gap that separates the two. Rooted in individualism, Europeans cultivate the search for happiness and cherish freedom of thought and of rational, scientific exploration, which are perceived as a human being's greatest privilege and finest adventure.

Conversely, aspiring to the Caliphate indicates the longing for a supreme authority owing its infallibility to Allah and his human intermediary, Mohammed. According to Ibn Khaldoun, this institution placing politics at the service of worldwide, religious expansionism was created as instrument for the mandatory Islamization of mankind. Faced today with this political archaism, a divided and broken West seeks refuge in denial and grasps at the demise of tiny Israel as though at a lifebelt. Taking in water from every side, this West that abandons its own identity for multilateralism and multiculturalism and ruins its citizenry by buying security has little chance of survival.

Comment: Read her last sentence several times. She is right. The West in its cowardice to defend its inheritance and identity has become self destructive and 'has little chance of survival'. I follow events very closely and do what I can but the greater trend is obvious. The US is going the way of Europe. Expect the rapid Islamization of the US over the next ten years and its rapid decline.

Saturday, October 2, 2010

Taner Akcam is wrong on Milosevic

The following is my response to an article by Taner Akcam at ArmenianWeekly that the latter would not post. They always spike that which is not politically correct in their multicultural world view, i.e., they worship at the Western altar of self hatred and carry water for the Islamic jihad without being conscious of it.

I have tremendous admiration for Taner Akcam, a Turkish man, for going where his detailed research and documentation took him, to speaking out on the historical truth of the Turks' Genocide of the Armenians. But on Milosevic being behind mass murder or crimes in Bosnia, Kosovo, or Croatia, Mr Akcam is not correct. Most of my fellow Armenians think and believe as Mr Akcam does on Milosevic or the Serbs without knowing any more than what they have read in the newspapers or heard on TV.

Here is one example among thousands to show how most have been misled. Roy Gutman won a Pulitzer Prize for reporting that Serbian soldiers had a camp (he was never there) holding several thousand Muslim women that were being raped. This was immediately front page news in Europe and the US. Several reporters in Bosnia decided to find that Serbian rape camp. The locals said yes, there were several thousand Muslim women being raped. As the reporters neared the site the locals there said there were hundreds of Muslim women being raped. When they arrived at the site there was no rape camp. The reporters found that four women had been raped. They filed reports on what they found but the networks spiked the reports. There are still books in stores that still talk about those terrible Serbs running that rape camp that never existed.

The one example above does not refer to Milosevic. Here I will only mention that Taner Akcam, like many others, makes the accusation that Milosevic was behind crimes against humanity in Croatia but the reality is that the Croatians committed the largest act of ethnic cleansing and mass murder in all the wars in Yugoslavia in the 1990’s when they expelled 250,000 Serbs from the Krajina. So what are the crimes of Milosevic in Croatia?

There are thousands more examples. Look for yourself, read the reports of UN personnel on the ground then read what the UN reported out of NY, read what reporters wrote that were eye witnesses then read what the networks reported; you will be shocked. You will be asking yourself how did reports X turn into reports Y?

By this point I am sure there is much hand wringing and the Armenians are asking how is this important to us. Remember the time in the 1990’s when Armenians were being murdered in Baku and Nagorno-Karabakh kicked out Azerbaijan? Do you remember what CNN was reporting? It was reporting that Armenians were mass murdering Muslims. Yes, this is correct, everyone seems or wants to forget. Azerbaijan was part of the conduit of the mujahideen from Muslim countries to jihad against the Christians of Bosnia, Kosovo, and Nagorno-Karabakh. The handlers of the mujahideen in Bosnia had seen how the gullible Western media would run any pro-Muslim report no matter how incredible. CNN approached the war over Nagorno-Karabakh with the same mentality and it’s no surprise that Azeri Muslims obliged. By this time I knew their modus operandi and expected the worse for Nagorno-Karabakh. But something happened that I didn’t expect. Armenians threatened CNN with extreme violence if their campaign of lies didn’t stop, and out of fear CNN did stop. To see Armenians stop that juggernaut Western lying machine in the service of the jihad made me a prouder Armenian. But most Armenians have forgotten or never knew the story.

Other than this one disagreement with Taner Akcam, who I have met in Oakland, I admire him and consider him a brave man.