Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ninety-Nine Eyes to Go

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ninety-Nine Eyes to Go

    Front page magazine
    Sept 20 2004


    Ninety-Nine Eyes to Go
    By Joseph D'Hippolito
    FrontPageMagazine.com | September 22, 2004

    As it rumbles down a narrow road in the West Bank, a steel-gray tank
    confronts a boy in his early teens, his right arm cocked, ready to
    throw a rock.

    "This occupying army is supported by the West," reads the caption
    above the tank. Another caption to the rock-thrower's left asks, "Who
    is going to support this boy?"

    That picture greets visitors to the Web site of the Islamic Human
    Rights Commission, an organization with a noble title and an ignoble
    purpose: to provide a front for anti-Western, anti-Semitic jihadism.
    The IHRC, based in London and founded in 1997, adopts the feminist
    and gay models for activism. The commission positions itself as the
    defender of Muslims around the world who have been victimized by what
    the group calls, "Islamophobia".

    How does the IHRC define "Islamophobia"? Just look at the "winners"
    of the commission's first Islamophobia Awards Ceremony late last
    year.

    Most Islamophobic Media Outlet: Fox Network News
    Most Islamophobic International Politician: Israeli Prime Minister
    Ariel Sharon.
    Islamophobe of the Year: President George W. Bush.

    To the IHRC, fighting "Islamophobia" means opposing laws that
    prohibit Muslim women from wearing headscarves, boycotting companies
    that do business in Israel and supporting radical Muslim clerics in
    custody (such as Sheikh Abdul Kareem Obeid, the leader of Hezbollah
    in Lebanon, who was freed in January), Chechen independence and the
    Palestinian intifada.

    The IHRC has even mastered the paranoid, hysterical rhetoric of its
    models. Massoud Shadjareh, the commission's chairman and co-founder,
    told the Edinburgh newspaper The Scotsman in February that proposals
    from Britain's Home Office to strengthen anti-terrorism laws were
    "the sort of legislation that in Germany led to genocide and
    concentration camps."

    One example of the IHRC's activism involves Iran's Arash Miresmaeili,
    the two-tim e world judo champion who refused to compete against an
    Israeli in the first round of this year's Olympic judo competition.

    As Front Page Magazine reported in "All Free Men Are Israeli
    Olympians," Miresmaeili said he deliberately forfeited to support the
    Palestinians. Olympic authorities considered expelling him from
    Athens, so the IHRC asked supporters to send form letters to the
    International Olympic Committee and the International Judo
    Federation.

    "That you should choose to differentiate between this political
    boycott and others, such as the boycott of South Africa under the
    apartheid regime, and of Serbia in 1992 for its commission of war
    crimes in Bosnia, smacks of sheer hypocrisy," part of the form letter
    states. "Further, it demeans the plight of the Palestinians and
    effectively legitimizes the Israeli policy of apartheid."

    Another example of IHRC activism is the work of lawyer Mudassar
    Arani, who received an award in June for what the commission called
    "challenging Islamophobia." Arani represents Sheikh Abu Hamsa
    al-Masri, who was arrested by British authorities and awaits
    extradition to the United States to face charges of supporting
    terrorism. The sheikh made these remarks in London's radical Finsbury
    Park Mosque one month before his arrest:

    "The ideology of martyrdom is spreading now in our (Islamic) nation,
    praise be to Allah," reported the Middle East Media Research
    Institute. "It exposes the (falsehood of the) People of the Book" -
    the Muslim term for Christians and Jews - "especially the Jews, who
    claim they are God's deputies on earth, but they are lying."

    IHRC activism includes spinning world events to portray Muslims as
    perpetual victims, never as perpetrators. Concerning the crisis in
    Sudan, the IHRC's Web site links to a story from Britain's Leftist
    newspaper, The Guardian, which reports that the European Union did
    not consider the killing in Sudan's Darfur region as genocide.
    Another link to a story from another British newspaper, The
    Independent, describes Sudanese Muslims being brutalized by
    non-Muslim tribesmen. The story quotes one 23-year-old refugee, Asif
    Omar Sayeed:

    "The foreigners blame us for everything," he said. "But I realize
    what is going on. The Americans and the British want to use this as
    an excuse to occupy our country, just as they have done in Iraq. Like
    Iraq, we have oil. What has happened made me realize that, as a true
    Muslim, I must fight for
    my country when the foreigners come."

    An IHRC report from 1996 concerning Chechnya issues an intimidating
    warning, particularly frightening in light of the massacre of
    schoolchildren in Beslan. After calling Russia "the only colonial
    dinosaur that remains in the modern world," the report concludes
    thus:

    "If international law does not rise to the challenge in the killing
    fields of Chechnya, it must prepare to be blown away in a cloud of i
    ts own dust and dreams."

    A link to an editorial from Crescent International magazine published
    after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks proves even more chilling. Some
    excerpts:

    "We know from past experience that people who feel themselves and
    their peoples to be under sustained and unrelenting attack can react
    in the most unbelievable ways.

    "The problem is that none of these (Americans) seem to realize that
    America has long been at war with numerous peoples all over the
    world. This is not the opening salvo of a new war; it is probably
    likely a stunningly successful attempt by one of America's many
    victims to hit back - very, very hard.

    "(The) argument is that democracy, freedom and civilization are under
    attack and must be forcefully defended; such words ring hollow from
    Ehud Barak, Ariel Sharon, Vladimir Putin, George W. Bush, Colin
    Powell and Tony Blair, each of whom has been responsible for far, far
    more death and suffering than seen in the US yesterday."

    By contrast, the IHRC shows no support for Muslims oppressed by
    Iran's brutal theocracy or by Syria's occupation of Lebanon. Nor does
    the group fight for civilians from Egypt, Kuwait and Turkey (let
    alone from Western nations) who were abducted and murdered in Iraq by
    ad hoc jihadists. That selective outrage accurately reflects the
    agenda of the IHRC's advisory board.

    One advisor is Dr. Muhammad al-Massari, who heads a London-based
    organization that seeks to overthrow the Saudi monarchy. Al-Massari
    said the 2001 attack on the World Trade Center "was a counterattack
    for the attacks on Iraq and Palestine," he told Associated Press.

    "One Muslim decided to take action," al-Massari said about Osama bin
    Laden. "He took one eye for a hundred. He still has 99 eyes to go."

    Another advisor is Hamid Algar, professor of Persian and Islamic
    Studies at UC Berkeley. In an address honoring Ayatollah Ruhollah
    Khomeini in 1994, Algar praised and advocated global jihad:

    "Let us remember the comprehensive Jihad that starts with our own
    persons and should also embrace our communal and political lives and
    if necessary go to the point of taking weapons in our hands to defeat
    the enemies of Islam."

    Algar immediately defined those enemies:

    "Let us remember the clear analysis of the West that Imam (Khomeini)
    gave us.. as a collection of international bandits.which has
    consolidated itself since Imam's death. Let us also remember his
    insistence that the abominable genocide state of Israel completely
    disappear from the face of the globe."

    In Algar's universe, jihad has no innocent victims. Witness his
    opinion of Palestinian suicide bombers.

    "That term, an invention of the West. is not very helpful," Algar
    told California Monthly, UC Berkeley's alumni magazine. "While no one
    can take pleasure in the sight, as you say, of women and children
    being killed, it seems to me th at a greater degree of moral
    condemnation should be reserved for those who continue, daily, with
    impunity, to kill and to humiliate the Palestinian people.

    "In other words, there is definitely a cause-and-effect relationship
    here, and to criticize or condemn an effect while overlooking the
    cause is not very helpful."

    Algar's support for violence is not always so polite. In 1998, he
    verbally harassed and spat upon members of UC Berkeley's Armenian
    Student Association, who were commemorating the genocide of Armenians
    by the Turks.

    "It was not a genocide, but I wish it were, you lying pigs," Shake
    Hovsepian quoted Algar for Usanogh: Periodical of Armenian Students.
    "You are distorting the truth about history. You stupid Armenians;
    you deserve to be massacred!"

    The students filed a grievance and Berkeley's Associated Students
    demanded that the administration force Algar to issue a written
    public apology or censure him.

    Another advisor is Mohammed al- Asi, a research fellow at the
    Institute of Contemporary Islamic Thought and the imam of the Islamic
    Center of Washington, D.C. Muslim student associations regularly
    invite al-Asi to speak at their events, where he dispenses more
    incendiary rhetoric.

    "The Zionist-Israeli lobby is taking the United States . to the
    abyss," al-Asi said at UC Irvine in 2001.

    "We have a psychosis in the Jewish community that is unable to
    co-exist equally and brotherly with other human beings. You can take
    the Jew out of the ghetto but you cannot take the ghetto out of the
    Jew."

    During the 1990-91 war to free Kuwait from Iraq, al-Asi said, "If the
    Americans are placing their forces in the Persian Gulf, we should be
    creating another war front for the Americans in the Muslim world -
    and
    specifically where American interests are concentrated."

    The long-term goal of such military action is the imposition of a
    worldwide Islamic state, as al-Asi stated in a paper presented in
    2000. Some excerpts:

    "...all the Muslims . are living in a kafir (unbelievers') domain;
    they are virtually adrift and homeless. The inherent condition of
    today's Muslims who have lost sight of a Prophet as commander is a
    religious community of people who are beholden to the forces and
    powers of kufr (apostasy): secular kufr and religious kufr, mental
    kufr and military kufr, as well as kufr by choice and kufr by force.

    "Never in the history of ijtihad (theological analysis) have we
    Muslims had to live in a time in which we no longer have in our
    possession a government which belongs to all the Muslims, or at the
    very minimum which is open to the Ummah's (community of believers')
    popular affiliation.

    "We should not be studying hair-splitting fiqhi (legalistic) issues
    in halaqat (study sessions and circles); we should be learning how to
    consolidate our social will-power and how to form active and
    status-quo-challenging units throughout our African and Asian lands
    to reclaim them for Islam."

    The world has heard similar rhetoric before.

    The Nazis cleverly manipulated the German people's collective
    frustration into a pervasive sense of victimization. Then the Nazis
    offered the answer: Germans should embrace their inherent
    superiority, forcefully claim their entitled power and destroy all
    who oppose them - even, as history showed, children.

    Given its selective outrage and its advisors' values, the Islamic
    Human Rights Commission is as much of a non sequitur as a National
    Socialist Human Rights Commission would be.
Working...
X