For further information about Sibel Edmonds, see also Stop Islamic Conquest: Gag Me.
From the 9/11 Commission Report (the numbers, which I have placed into brackets, are footnotes to the report; see the link for references):
Having issued directives to guide his administration's preparations for war, on Thursday, September 20, President Bush addressed the nation before a joint session of Congress. "Tonight," he said, "we are a country awakened to danger." [80] The President blamed al Qaeda for 9/11 and the 1998 embassy bombings and, for the first time, declared that al Qaeda was "responsible for bombing the USS Cole." [81] He reiterated the ultimatum that had already been conveyed privately. "The Taliban must act, and act immediately," he said. "They will hand over the terrorists, or they will share in their fate." [82] The President added that America's quarrel was not with Islam: "The enemy of America is not our many Muslim friends; it is not our many Arab friends. Our enemy is a radical network of terrorists, and every government that supports them." Other regimes faced hard choices, he pointed out: "Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make: Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."
President George W. Bush, Thursday, September 20, 2001:
"Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make: Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."
The Highjacking of a Nation Part 2: The Auctioning of Former Statesmen & Dime a Dozen Generals, by Sibel Edmonds, November 29, 2006
Moreover, as we all know, those subject to criticism in these articles [referring to Sibel Edmonds series; see source link above - Y.D.] have mastered the art of spinning when it comes to the media and propaganda. The Israeli lobby is quick to stamp all factually backed criticism as ‘anti-Semitic’ and attack it as such. The Turkish lobby, in this regard, as with everything else, follows its Israeli mentors; they label all dissent and criticism as anti-Turkey, or, Kurdish or Armenian propaganda; while the Saudi lobby goes around kicking and screaming ‘anti-Muslim propaganda.’
Some of those screams can be heard here:
Islamophobia Watch -- Islamophobia: A Definition
Runnymede Trust:
The Runnymede Trust has identified eight components that they say define Islamophobia.
This definition, from the 1997 document 'Islamophobia: A Challenge For Us All' is widely accepted, including by the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia.
The eight components are:
1) Islam is seen as a monolithic bloc, static and unresponsive to change.
2) Islam is seen as separate and 'other'. It does not have values in common with other cultures, is not affected by them and does not influence them.
3) Islam is seen as inferior to the West. It is seen as barbaric, irrational, primitive and sexist.
4) Islam is seen as violent, aggressive, threatening, supportive of terrorism and engaged in a 'clash of civilisations'.
5) Islam is seen as a political ideology and is used for political or military advantage.
6) Criticisms made of the West by Islam are rejected out of hand.
7) Hostility towards Islam is used to justify discriminatory practices towards Muslims and exclusion of Muslims from mainstream society.
8) Anti-Muslim hostility is seen as natural or normal.
Salaam website:
An excellent definition also appears on the Salaam website written by "al-Maktabi":
"the term 'Islamophobia' does not adequately express the full range and depth of antipathy towards Islam and Muslims in the West today. It is an inadequate term."
"A more accurate expression would be 'anti-Islamic racism' for it combines the elements of dislike of a religion and active discrimination against the people belonging to that religion."
Imam Dr Abduljalil Sajid:
One of the members of the Runnymede Trust's Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia which published the famous 1997 report argues that:
"Hostility towards Islam and Muslims has been a feature of European societies since the eighth century of the Common Era. It has taken different forms, however, at different times and has fulfilled a variety of functions. For example, the hostility in Spain in the fifteenth century was not the same as the hostility that had been expressed and mobilised in the Crusades. Nor was the hostility during the time of the Ottoman Empire or that which was prevalent throughout the age of empires and colonialism. It may be more apt to speak of 'Islamophobias' rather than of a single phenomenon. Each version of Islamophobia has its own features as well as similarities with, and borrowings from, other versions."
Islamophobia: An Irrational Fear or Prejudice Towards Islam and Muslims (See source for notes corresponding to numbers in brackets.)
Islamophobia defined...
Islamophobia is a neologism used to refer to an irrational fear or prejudice towards Muslims and the religion of Islam.
Some believe that prejudice against Muslims has increased since the September 11, 2001 attacks. Dr Abduljalil Sajid, an adviser to the Commission on British Muslims, an anti-racism group, has said he believes many organizations are "institutionally Islamophobic". He has said that "since the 11 September attacks the single most important concern has been police harassment of Muslims. Even one of (Britain's) Muslim peers... has been stopped twice by police." [1]
Many human rights organizations have documented this recent increase in Islamophobic events and hate crimes against Muslims [2] and Islamic organizations have done the same [3]. Secretary-General Kofi Annan told a December 7, 2004 UN conference on the emergence of Islamophobia that "(when) the world is compelled to coin a new term to take account of increasingly widespread bigotry — that is a sad and troubling development. Such is the case with 'Islamophobia'." [4]
American journalist Stephen Schwartz has defined Islamophobia as the condemnation of the entirety of Islam and its history as extremist, denying the existence of a moderate Muslim majority, regarding Islam as a problem for the world, treating conflicts involving Muslims as necessarily their own fault, insisting that Muslims make changes to their religion, and inciting war against Islam as a whole.
Islamophobia: Muslim organisations slam SA terror fears
Muslims in South Africa could wrongly be suspected of being involved in terrorism due to comments by intelligence officials that the country has become a haven for terrorists, Muslim organisations warned.
The Media Review Network and the Muslim Judicial Council said they were "deeply perturbed" at the remarks by Barry Gilder, the coordinator of the National Intelligence Co-ordinating Committee (Nicoc) [NICOC from South Africa; see links below -- Y.D.], in which he implied that South Africa was a "haven for terrorists".
Nicoc is an inter-agency body. "We are outraged by these accusations which lack evidence and have the potential to raise a cloud of suspicion over the entire Muslim community of South Africa," the organisations said in statement.
NICOC:
The Intelligence Community
National Intelligence Coordinating Committee
Again from Islamophobia: Muslim organisations slam SA terror fears
Fear of harassment
They said such hints could unjustifiably set up Muslim organisations for scrutiny and harassment by law-enforcement agencies. Yesterday, Gilder said that agents were watching certain individuals and organisations, including foreign visitors, who might be involved in international terrorism.
"We are concerned that terrorists are spending time here... It is something we are taking very seriously," Gilder said.
He said South Africa was not a staging area for terrorism, but rather a place where those involved come to lay low and that the country was not likely to be a terrorist target.
Muslims integrity ‘blemished'
The organisations said such comments were liable to "fuel Islamophobia", especially because Gilder said most people on the watch list originated from Pakistan, Somalia, Bangladesh and Jordan.
The organisations called on government to refrain from "resorting to such wild allegations" which they said unfairly blemished the integrity of Muslims and their organisations.
President George W. Bush, Thursday, September 20, 2001:
"Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make: Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."
What I find interesting is the effect the President's statement has on domestic American politics. People who question any of the President's policies -- the Democrats, for example -- are "with the terrorists"; domestic disagreement is effectively pigeonholed.
"Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."
Bush presents himself and the terrorists as enemies, and anybody who isn't with him is with them.
That's a convenient rule to be able to make when you have friends who are making one hell of killing by doing business with corrupt regimes that traffic narcotics and sponsor terrorism.
No comments:
Post a Comment