June 1, 2009
Islamic Oppression of non-Muslims
By Alyssa A. Lappen
RightSideNews Copyright © 2009
According to a central tenet of Islam, any lands that Muslims ever conquered or controlled belong to Islam for eternity. Muslims believe themselves “the best of peoples, evolved for mankind” (Qur’an 3: 110)—and appointed to hold all lands in trust for Allah. Both Sunni and Shi’ite followers of Mohamed’s 7th century ideology also envision an end-time Islamic Apocalypse forcibly gathering all non-Muslims within their faith—eliminating all known beliefs except Islam—and rendering the whole planet earth an Islamic trust.
On these shari’a (i.e., Islamic law) concepts rest the Muslim contention that the United Nations’ 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is inadequate: The UDHR neither appoints Muslims guardians of humanity, nor restricts the rights of non-Muslims and women. Therefore, 56 Muslim nations in the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) consider the Universal Declaration of Human Rights obsolete and irrelevant. They want “an independent permanent body to promote human rights” among U.N. member states “in accordance with” the Cairo Declaration and its foundational shari’a legal code—denying all essential human rights to non-Muslims and women.
The OIC ultimately hopes to replace universal human rights with universal shari’a law, granting superiority to the Muslim ummah (“nation”) while imposing dhimmitude, — i.e., intense, institutionalized subservience, probably best described as human rights apartheid — upon all others. Indeed, the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam (CDHRI), rooted in shari’a law and adopted in August 1990 at the 19th Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers, like the Qur’an presupposes that mankind is already obliged to follow all commandments of Islamic law:
“[N]o one as a matter of principle has the right to suspend in whole or in part or violate or ignore [fundamental rights and universal freedoms for Muslims] in as much as they are binding divine commandments, which are contained in the Revealed Books of God and were sent through the last of His Prophets to complete the preceding divine messages thereby making their observance an act of worship and their neglect or violation an abominable sin, and accordingly every person is individually responsible … for their safeguard. (emphasis added)
The OIC has been building pressure for years. In December 2005, Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal revealed his “Mecca Declaration” to a Jeddah “preparatory meeting of OIC ministers“—a 10-year “plan of action to confront the challenges of the 21st century” to counter a “harsh offensive on Islam from enemies abroad and some of its own children with deviant ideologies.” Turkish OIC secretary general Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu praised the plan as a “roadmap for Islamic common action.”
Indeed, the OIC has always adulated tyranny and oppression, conforming to the classical Islamic ideology of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna—and his contemporary Hajj Amin al-Husseini. Upon his 1929 appointment as Jerusalem mufti, al-Husseini circulated faked postcards of Al Aqsa mosque flying a “Zionist” flag atop the Temple Mount to inflame Muslim hatred and violence against Jerusalem’s Jewish majority.  The Muslim Brotherhood mimicked this very “defense” of Islam by establishing the OIC after a lone lunatic man set fire to Al Aqsa in 1969. The MB in this way conveniently wall-papered its hope of eliminating the “Zionist occupation” — that is, of entirely purging Jews and Judaism from the ancient Jewish capitol, just as Mohamed had purged Jews from Mecca and Arabia.
In March 1970, “pending the liberation of Jerusalem,” the First Islamic Conference of Ministers of Foreign Affairs established its Jeddah General Secretariat. (No surprise that the OIC now wants to wrest sovereignty over the Temple Mount from Israel.) In 1973, the OIC planned to discriminate further by creating the Islamic Development Bank (IDB) “in accordance with the principles of the Shari’a.”
For decades afterwards, longtime World Union of Progressive Judaism (WUPJ) representative, historian David G. Littman, warned of a concerted effort at the U.N. to supplant universal human rights with the shari’a-based discriminatory system of dhimmitude. He was correct.
In May 2007, 36th Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers (ICFM) in Islamabad resolved to impose human rights apartheid through a new Islamic Charter on Human Rights, a Convention on Women’s Rights in Islam and an Islamic Covenant Against Racial Discrimination. The ICFM also seeks U.N. “observer status” for various “interested non-governmental organizations (NGOs),” undoubtedly including many Islamic “charities.”
Naturally, Muslim leaders deny their discriminatory intentions. At the 6th Session of the Human Rights Council on Dec. 10, 2007, for example, Pakistan Ambassador to the U.N. Masood Khan falsely contended on OIC behalf that its 56 Muslim member nations had “made substantial contributions to the development of the Universal Declaration and the two International Covenants,” concerning matters of “religious freedom, social justice, the indivisibility of human rights and the right to self-determination.”
Yet Islamic and African countries that regularly violate human rights dominate the HRC, which favors Islamic blasphemy laws making it a capital offense to quote Qur’anic passages or shari’a law, much less to criticize Mohammed in any forum at the U.N. This shari’a-based mindset takes Islam as inviolable—and all that that implies.
Thus in 2008 the Geneva office of the 47-member U.N. Human Rights Council—where historian Littman is an NGO—began implementing shari’a principles even as it made the very word verboten. On March 26, 2009, followed the 23-nation HRC “simple majority” passage of a Pakistani resolution to protect “against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions and incitement to religious hatred in general.”
As Islamic scholar Ann Elizabeth Mayer notes in Islam and Human Rights: Tradition and Politics,
[N]o theory in international law … supports the notion that fundamental human rights may be curtailed — much less permanently curtailed — by reference to the requirements of any particular religion. Under international law, non-Muslims cannot be legally deprived of their rights by the use of Islamic standards. There is also no warrant under international law for Muslims being deprived of their rights due to governmental application of restrictions taken from Islamic law.” (Mayer, Westview Press, 2nd edition, p. 64)
Leading Muslim figures frequently claim to support universal human rights—a point often discussed at Right Side News. Yet the OIC hopes to eliminate freedom of speech. Increasing implementation of human rights and religious apartheid, however the OIC veils it, will surely follow if the OIC succeeds.
Mohamed established his ideology’s central shrine at the Kabba in Mecca. There, pre-Islamic Arabians worshiped a pantheon of gods, including idols, stones and “heavenly bodies” such as the sun, moon and stars, according to Sir William Muir‘s 19th century Life of Mahomet. Atop this pre-Islamic prayer site, Mohamed built thinking and a 1400 year history espousing suppression and oppression of others. It steals and suppresses other peoples’ sacred books, prophets, holy sites—and above all, their very human rights—with a hope for end-game Muslim supremacy over all others.
Among those fiercely opposing such religious and human rights apartheid, has been the incomparable AtlasShrugs publisher, Pamela Geller. In this third interview in an exclusive Right Side News series, investigative journalist Alyssa A. Lappen continues her discussion with Geller—this time on Islamic oppression of non-Muslims. [Read Part One here; read Part Two here]
Alyssa A. Lappen: We’ve already discussed Islamic suppression of free speech and Muslim abuse of women. Today, let’s turn to the seemingly central Islamic theology encouraging the oppression of others, that is, non-Muslims. What turned your attention to this phenomenon?
Atlas: 9/11 took me down this road—when our great nation was attacked by Islamic jihadis. At that time, I did not know anything about the enemy or who attacked us, or why.
The more I studied and researched, the more difficult it became to plow through layers upon layers of deception and propaganda. I almost had to make it a life’s project.
AAL: So, what have you learned, in general, about the oppressive nature of this belief system?
Atlas: Now, understand me. This is not a new enemy. It’s centuries old. Islam has taken all the tenets of religion and turned them into a new evil.
In Judaism, a basic tenet of Judaism, is not to convert others, and not to proselytize. In order to convert, a person not born as a Jew really has to want it. He or she must really be in love with someone, or in love with the ideas of goodness. But by and large, Judaism frowns upon outreach to or conversion of others.
Christians did not subscribe to the Jewish system. They do support and seek conversion of others. [While historically Christians forcibly converted others, this was a religious interpretation, not a dictate.] Christianity sent missionaries to the most dangerous places in the world, always in this [relatively] peaceful way. They offered, food, clothing, education, and God’s love. Not violence.
Then you had Islam. This took the conversion idea, and made it into a violent act. It was “Convert or die.” Should anyone have a change of heart, it becomes a death sentence. Even today, apostates [from Islam] have death sentences hanging over their heads. If non-Muslim subjects within Islamic lands accepted dhimmitude, they also accepted daily humiliation. They’d pay a jizya [onerous head tax] to live, and were demeaned by believers. I dislike scholars like [Bernard] Lewis, who present dhimmitude inside an Islamic empire in a Hollywood, glorified kind of way. We have to tell the truth about Islam. And those of us who tell the truth are labeled racists and bigots and Islamophobes.
AAL: Does oppression of others under Islam vary or is it more or less universal?
Atlas: The oppression of non-believers exists in every Islamic country. Shari’a law is oppressive. All those terrible acts committed in the name of Islam—honor killings, clitorectomies, death for apostasy, death to hypocrites—all happen under shari’a law. This is not under in any way, shape or form compatible with Democratic law. There’s no such thing as a little shari’a law. It’s like being a little bit pregnant. Shari’a taints the law. You cannot introduce this bad blood into good law and end up with good law.
It is like the [1958 classic horror movie] “The Blob. The more the blob consumes, the bigger it gets, the more it eats, the more it morphs into something bigger and bigger. Society is then completely overwhelmed. And we see it in America. We see the introduction of shari’a in America. When workers in Greeley [Colorado] or Emporia [Kansas] insist on prayer time in the work place, this is a form of Islamic supremacism. So are foot baths in public places like airports or universities, or Muslim-only prayer rooms in universities. They are special rights for special classes. So are special prayer rights for a special class, in this case Muslims in public schools, that is, giving Muslims special prayer times or closing schools on Muslim holidays. Some places like Seattle, Washington have also introduced special swim time for Muslims in public pools, often paid by taxpayers’ public, government funds.
In and of itself, it seems innocent. So, the boy needs to pray. It’s no big deal. Give him a special place and time for prayer. But this is what Muslims do. It is part of the [Islamization] movement. This needs to be seen in the context of an overall assault on a society. Muslims who have left their countries to escape this oppression should be speaking out the loudest but they are not.
AAL: Aren’t there are some ex-Muslims and a handful of Muslims speaking out about the assault on Western Democratic values?
Atlas: Wafa Sultan is the only American in decades whom threats have forced to live in hiding. She should be hidden in White House. The media’s lack of coverage of her case is criminal. Hers should be a cause cÃ©lÃ¨bre. Her situation is among the most damaging to freedom of speech.
AAL: What’s the prognosis for positive change?
Atlas: If the hate crime laws pass under a very Islamic-sympathizing president, then voices and websites like mine will be shut down. It will be over. The line in the sand rests on freedom of speech. That is the basis of this country.
Even ugly speech. We see and saw this in “death to the Jews” rallies. We saw it the last generation, in 1970s Nazis rallies Skokie, Illinois. That is freedom of speech. The media demonizes the Tea Parties [protesting Obama’s profligate spending.] This is not an Islamic issue. But it is part of the leftist Islamic issue. You see the demonizing of free speech. This is the most dangerous development. The demonization of Geert Wilders is very dangerous.
AAL: Don’t you think that U.S. citizens are starting to yell “basta,” enough?
Atlas: The April headlines in the New Haven paper were the exception, not the rule. Tea Parties, nationwide, are more routinely painted as a sinister Republican movement, organized by right wing extremists and clowns. In New York, the media used that description even though an estimated 13,000 people attended the Tea Party there.
These people never went to a rally before. They feel the heat. They feel the hot breath of government on their necks. They feel a fascist reality taking hold. They see enslavement in their workplaces, and the encroaching government controls. People came who voted for Obama. They said they made a mistake. There were business owners. People spoke about the oppressive taxation and the nationalization of banks, auto companies, and the impending bailouts of media.
Once we have a bailout of media, it is over. Who will insult the leader, when he is signing the paycheck?
AAL: What are you talking about. Bailing out the media, the networks?
Atlas: Yes, there is talk of bailing out local newspapers, on the East and West coasts, bankrupt metropolitan newspapers, as well as MSNBC and NBC. Yes. There is talk of reclassifying newspapers as nonprofit organizations. There are all kinds of ways to skin a cat. One includes subsidies to go to the NBC parent company, General Electric, through Obama’s much-touted “cap and trade,” his purported energy renewal program. Obama does not call this nationalization. But we have an Orwellian president who never calls things by their real names. The government has banned the term “war on terror.” He calls war a “contingent operation.” The word “terrorism” has been replaced by “man made disaster.” Obama has removed the enemy from all public discussions.
AAL: How is this related to Islamic oppression of non-Muslims.
Atlas: If you look at history, this is how Muslims have conducted Islamic jihad. And in the modern world, Orwellian language has entered the Islamic sphere, too. Obama does not want us to say the word “jihadi.” These men are not conducting “jihad.” They are suffering from “mental illness.” So according to Obama, every jihadi is just mentally ill.
Meanwhile, the U.S. State Department has set all kinds of new immigration quotas from countries that are the worst state sponsors of terrorism. They are terrorist nations. The State Department does not call them that. But Pakistan, Afghanistan, Egypt are terrorist nations. And from these countries, the U.S. Is now importing the largest invasion of enemy combatants in the history of man. We are experiencing an invasion of a foreign enemy, of a very large proportion.
AAL: So, while freedom of speech is itself a huge issue, we are no longer discussing freedom of speech alone. We’re talking about freedom, period. Just plain freedom.
Atlas: Yes. We are literally abdicating American sovereignty. The Obama administration, along with the Muslim globalists, paint everything as a global problem. And for global problems, there can only be global solutions. So we see the rise of a transnational movement, which advocates abdicating U.S. sovereignty to the U.N. And the U.N. is driven by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). And they are, as you have reported before, the creation of the Muslim Brotherhood. OIC objectives are clear. It is a sinister machination. It is made up of 56 nations, plus “Palestine.” They unwaveringly vote together as a single bloc. No one ever goes off the Islamic reservation. Their issue is Islamic supremacy. That is the definition of Islam. They impose Islam. They pass UN resolutions against “defamation of Islam.” That is code for freedom of speech. They never discuss the defamation of Judaism or Jews or Christianity. That is the OIC currency. So yes, the worldwide global conspiracy, the fact of Islamic jihad is tied into all things. It is embedded in schools and universities. The Saudis give millions and millions of dollars to affect their curricula with mendacious teachings and textbooks, whose distribution they fund through various “non-profit” organizations, by overwhelming local communities and also in co-ordination with U.S. textbook companies themselves.
They orchestrated textbook chapters devoted to Mohamed. In small towns and cities across America, like Nashville, they impose Islam—in schools, by shuttering conferences featuring Geert Wilders, or by women refusing to remove their veils for drivers’ license photos. They create law by creating precedents, they build a bigger empire, step by step. And they could never do it all without help from the left. I did not become aware of this until I started blogging about anti-war rallies, and anti-Israel rallies. Muslims at these rallies are anything but peaceful. Without fail, they are supported by the most notorious left wing groups like A.N.S.W.E.R., CODEPINK, various communist and socialist organizations.
AAL: How does Obama’s presidency affect matters?
Atlas: The White House radical couldn’t have arrived there without aid from leftists. They tackled the Vietnam War with propaganda and have poisoned America for so long, that instead of thinking critically and believing their eyes, people believe leftist and Islamic lies. The White House apologist supports nefarious movements and actions. He says, “these are things with which we may not agree, but we have to respect.”
No, I don’t respect honor killings. No. I don’t see Adolph Hitler in 1940s American news reels, giving his side. We can’t pretend nothing is happening. Look at Obama’s cultural psyops [psychological operations]. Our “dear leader” is on TV everyday with Orwellian speeches. If Obama wants to be a movie star, let him move to Hollywood. The media fawns and swoons and talks about how cool he is. You’re against him? You’re not cool. You’re against Janeane [Garofalo]? She demonizes rational people and logical men. If the truth is extreme, I’m an extremist.
AAL: How does this relate to Islamic supremacism?
Atlas: We’re faced with subversion of the U.S. Constitution through international law. Our forefathers did not fight and die for OIC-made international law. Who are the OIC? Expect no resistance from England. France? Jihad conquered them. England and France refused to withdraw from the U.N.’s Jew-hating Durban II conference. England lets Muslims have multiple wives and get social benefits for multiple families. Radicals can emigrate. Geert Wilders heads the leading Dutch political [Party for Freedom, PVV]. Holland’s Supreme Court will let the government try him for “hate speech,” for quoting the Qur’an. The OIC-dominated European Union subverts Dutch laws.
For the first time in Israel’s history, it doesn’t have a friend in the White House. Obama has met Hugo Chavez. He agreed to meet every other low-life violent pig, including Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, despite his anti-Semitic Durban II tirade and endless promises to annihilate Israel. [Israeli] Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu must join hands in tight new alliances with China and India. China’s only future is current revenue. But every free nation, including Israel, must preserve its national self interest.
The free world—Japan, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, everyone formerly under the U.S. umbrella, who didn’t go nuclear, knowing that America had its back—must now scramble for new cover and allies. The U.S. no longer protects its friends. They’re not friends any more. New U.S. friends are [Raul] Castro, Ahmadinjehad, Chavez—all this in only four months.
Obama will be the longest 4-year president in history.
AAL: What do you envision at the Congressional mid-term election, in 18 months?
Atlas: There’s a good chance for reversal. Obama is giving tax relief to buy the 2010 election. The grass roots Tea Parties counter him. CNBS trading-floor commentator Rick Santelli started this amazing phenomenon. It caught on like wildfire.
AAL: Do the Tea Parties understand the Islamic component?
Atlas: No. It’s hidden from them. American print media are firmly entrenched in dhimmitude and they follow Obama’s blue print, spelled out in his April 2009 Doha compact at the OIC Alliance of Civilizations’ 2nd Forum in Istanbul. The Doha compact repudiates U.S. Democratic ideas and self-defense, subsuming U.S. national interests to please the Muslim world. Tea Party organizers don’t know; U.S. newspapers didn’t report it. But the enemy doesn’t intend to get along. In what Muslim nation would U.S. citizens want to live? If the U.S. takes on Islamic values, why would America be different? Islam hangs all Brittanies [Spears] wearing no underwear—and all National Enquirer celebrity subjects.
AAL: Would you say critics of Islam are racist?
Atlas: The media consider anyone who speaks against Obama a racist. They play into the OIC line. Americans would rather be called anything—anything other than racists. That word is equivalent to being accused of all seven deadly sins at once. It’s not funny. We’ve been clubbed with the racist thing. But the U.S. wasn’t, and isn’t racist. We’re not a perfect country. But in the 70s, racism was already history. The Civil War and civil rights wars were fought. It was over when I was growing up in the 1970s. In the early 19th century, women had had their suffragettes. It was all fixed. Over. Of course, we are not a racist nation. Otherwise, Obama couldn’t have been elected.
Only real racists love Obama for his race. He has served racism like Thanksgiving dinner—and he drives the race issue every day. He is creating new racism. This is wrong.
AAL: Is Obama hostile to Israel? Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told Jews not to build homes in Jerusalem. Israeli Press Director Daniel Seaman replied that he admires “Iroquois territory” residents who assume “they have a right to determine where Jews should live…”
Atlas: Obama says Israelis want two states. The Jewish people do not want a Jew-hating jihad state up their ass. If Netanyahu can stand up against a tsunami of threats, and intimidation, he’ll be the new leader of the free world.
It will be very hard, as always. Any Jew who questions this should watch a Nazi SS interview at Treblinka. They talked in stunning detail on machinations of systematic extermination—how to handle bodies, about the cesspool of flesh below that surfaced outside the Nazi mess hall. On the trains, mothers from the time’s most advanced society, who’d thought themselves accepted, slashed their daughters’ wrists. It’s the same thing, all over. We have no choice.
AAL: At this series’ outset, you were optimistic. Are you still optimistic?
Atlas: Yes, I believe in God. I believe in good triumphing over evil. Islam will not win in the long run. The short term looks to be very devastating. We’re not experiencing a violent jihad alone. It’s a social, national, legal and economic jihad. We see whole continents moving to Islam. The Middle East was once Christian. Africa will go next. Muslims have no sense of time. To say they have not conquered anything in the last five minutes amounts to stunning stupidity. America is ripe for infiltration. We need basic principals as part of our epistemology, and moral compass.
However, I’m part of the Human Rights Coalition—Jews, Coptic Christians, Hindus. We’re not one people, one nation alone. All freedom loving people must join together, whatever their stripe to fight.
AAL: Let’s suppose moment the unimaginable—that we lose. What would the U.S. be like, living with dhimmitude?
Atlas: There are historical examples. In Morocco, before plumbing, each week the Muslims carted all of their excrement, literally, carted it all to the Jewish quarter and dumped it on Saturday. Then the Jews would have to wait until sundown [the end of Sabbath] to clean up the Muslims’ weekly crap. [In Iran], Jews weren’t allowed to go out in the rain. Jews could be killed for that. [They were najas, dirty.] Water might splash off a non-believer onto a Muslim and dirty them. It’s an “otherness.” Jews lived with sub human status. Each Muslim country would manifest the penalties upon dhimmis differently. Islamic history is rife with aggression. Years ago, I met a Turkish Jewish family. One said it was fine—but was always aware of being a Jew, despite Turkey having been at a supposed peak of secular Muslim democracy. Turkey is now an Islamic country; They elected [PKK Prime Minister Recep Tayyip] Erdogon. His Islamic party controls the government.
AAL: So can you please repeat, why are you optimistic?
Atlas: We can fight. If we fight there is hope. We can fight each fight, and fight each battle the same way Muslims fight each battle. They want Muslim prayer in schools. We have to say no. The Saudi academy wants to expand. We have to show up at every municipal hearing and say, “No.” There was a hearing on public access TV and many great Americans showed up. The audience was teaming with radical Muslims. It took a lot of balls to stand up before 600 belligerent Muslims. But people did stand up. And each battle must be waged like this. Each attempt at Islamic supremacism must be beaten back. We can, and we have to, respond more aggressively. They have achieved a great many goals without violence. In Europe they use violence. But in America, in real America, we are not cowards. Muslims want to make it an intellectual argument and appeal to liberal guilt. But once people understand the enemy, we can win this intellectual war.
AAL: How important is AtlasShrugs in this effort?
Atlas: Every day I get more and more readers. AtlasShrugs gets roughly 700,000 page views a month. People want to know. The more folks learn, the quicker we can take back this country and the sooner we can beat back the enemies within. The blogs would assume leadership a lot faster if the government were not involved in bailing out media. News media are failing for a reason. But we can win this intellectual war. Islam will not suppress America.
 Samuel Katz, Battleground: Fact and Fantasy in Palestine, 1985 edition, p. 77.
Alyssa A. Lappen, a freelance investigative journalist, is a former senior fellow of the American Center for Democracy, former senior editor of Institutional Investor, Working Woman and Corporate Finance and former associate editor of Forbes. Her work has also appeared in FrontPage Magazine, the Washington Examiner, Washington Times, Pajamas Media, American Thinker, Human Events, Right Side News, Midstream and Revue Politique. Her website is http://www.alyssaalappen.org/