Posted tagged ‘Muslim nations’

Dr. Jasser participates in a panel discussion about the state of the Middle East & ISIS

February 25, 2017

Dr. Jasser participates in a panel discussion about the state of the Middle East & ISIS, AIFD via YouTube, February 24, 2017

(It’s an about thirty-five minute long video about Middle East related topics, including America’s relations with Russia, Islamist terrorism, Islamist nations, the clash between Judeo-Christian and Islamist cultures and what the Trump administration can and should do. — DM)

 

Extremist Muslims’ One-Way Street

February 24, 2017

Extremist Muslims’ One-Way Street, Gatestone InstituteBurak Bekdil, February 24, 2017

Extremist Muslims’ understanding of freedom is a one-way street: Freedoms, such as religious rights, are “good” and must be defended if they are intended for Muslims — often where Muslims are in minority. But they can simply be ignored if they are intended for non-Muslims — often in lands where Muslims make up the majority.

Many Muslim countries, apparently, already have travel bans against other Muslims, in addition to banning Israelis.

Look at Saudi Arabia. Deportation and a lifetime ban is the minimum penalty for non-Muslims trying to enter the holy cities of Mecca and Medina.

Given the state of non-Muslim religious and human rights, and the sheer lack of religious pluralism in most Muslim countries, why do Muslim nations suddenly become human rights champions in the face of a ban on travel to the U.S.?

Meanwhile, Muslims will keep on loving the “infidels” who support Muslim rights in non-Muslim lands, while keeping up intimidation of the same “infidels” in their own lands.

President Donald Trump’s executive order of January 27, 2017, temporarily limiting entry from seven majority-Muslim countries – Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen — for 90 days, until vetting procedures can be put in place — has caused international controversy, sparking protests both in the Western and Islamic worlds, including in increasingly Islamist Turkey.

This article does not intend to discuss whether Trump’s ban is a racist, illegal order, or a perfectly justified action in light of threatened American interests. The ban, right or wrong, has once again unveiled the hypocrisy of extremist Muslims on civil liberties and on what is and what is NOT racist. Extremist Muslims’ understanding of freedom is a one-way street: Freedoms, such as religious rights, are “good” and must be defended if they are intended for Muslims — often where Muslims are in minority. But they can simply be ignored if they are intended for non-Muslims — often in lands where Muslims make up the majority.

Muslims have been in a rage across the world. Iran’s swift and sharp answer came in a Tweet from Foreign Minister Javad Zarif who said that the ban was “a great gift to extremists.” A government statement in Tehran said that the U.S. travel restrictions were an insult to the Muslim world, and threatened U.S. citizens with “reciprocal measures.” Many Muslim countries, apparently, already have travel bans against other Muslims, in addition to banning Israelis.

2097

Sudan, host and supporter of various extremist Muslim terror groups including al-Qaeda, said the ban was “very unfortunate.” In Iraq, a coalition of paramilitary groups called on the government to ban U.S. nationals from entering the country and to expel those currently on Iraqi soil.

In Turkey where the extremist Islamic government is unusually soft on Trump’s ban — in order not to antagonize the new president — a senior government official called the order “a discriminative decision.” Deputy Prime Minister and government spokesman Numan Kurtulmus said:

“Unfortunately, I am of the opinion that rising Islamophobia, xenophobia and anti-immigrant feelings have a great weight on this decision. Taking such a decision in a country such as America, where different ethnic and religious groups are able to co-exist, is very offensive.”

The ruling party’s deputy chairman, Yasin Aktay, called the ban “racist,” and said: “This is totally against human rights, a big violation of human rights.” Aktay also said that he had started to “worry about the future of the U.S.”

Turkey’s top Muslim cleric, Mehmet Gormez, praised the Americans who rushed to the airports to protest the ban. “[This] is very important. It gives us hope,” he said — presumably meaning that non-Muslim protestors will continue to advocate for Muslim rights in non-Muslim lands.

Turkish government bigwigs and the top Islamic authority seem not to have heard of their own country’s dismal human rights record when it comes to non-Muslim minorities. Most recently, Turkey’s Association of Protestant Churches noted in a report that hate speech against the country’s Christians increased in both the traditional media and social media. It said that hate speech against Protestants persisted throughout 2016, in addition to physical attacks on Protestant individuals and their churches.

Nevertheless, the Islamist’s one-way sympathy for human rights (for Muslims) and his one-way affection for discrimination (against non-Muslims) is not just Turkish, but global. What is the treatment of non-Muslim (or sometimes even non-extremist Muslim) visitors to some of the Muslim cities and sites in the countries that decry Trump’s “racist,” and “discriminative” ban that “violates human rights?”

In a 2016 visit to the Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, the Muslim custodians of the site did not allow entry to this author, despite the Turkish passport submitted to them, saying “you do not look Muslim enough.” And Muslims now complain of “discrimination?” Incidentally, Al Aqsa Mosque is, theoretically at least, open to visits from non-Muslims, except on Fridays.

Look at Saudi Arabia. Deportation and a lifetime ban is the minimum penalty for non-Muslims trying to enter the holy cities of Mecca and Medina. In 2013, the Saudi Minister of Justice, Mohamed el-Eissi, insisted that “the cradle of the Muslim sanctities will not allow the establishment of any other places of worship.”

The Saudi ban on other religious houses of worship comes from a Salafi tradition that prohibits the existence of two religions in the Arabian Peninsula. In the Saudi kingdom, the law requires that all citizens must be Muslims; the government does not provide legal protection for freedom of religion; and the public practice of non-Muslim religions is prohibited.

In Iran, where even non-Muslim female visitors must wear the Islamic headscarf, the government continues to imprison, harass, intimidate and discriminate against people based on religious beliefs. A 2014 U.S. State Department annual report noted that non-Muslims faced “substantial societal discrimination, aided by official support.” At the release of the report, then Secretary of State John Kerry said: “Sadly, the pages of this report that are being released today are filled with accounts of minorities being denied rights in countries like Burma, Iran, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, many others”.

In Iran, marriages between Muslim women and non-Muslim men are not recognized unless the husband produces proof that he has converted to Islam. The mullahs’ government does not ensure the right of citizens to change or renounce their religious faith. Apostasy, specifically conversion from Islam, can be punishable by death. In 2013, 79 people from religious minorities were sentenced to a total of 3,620 months in prison, 200 months of probation, 75 lashes and 41 billion rials in fines [approximately $1.3 million].

That being the state of non-Muslim religious and human rights, and the sheer lack of religious pluralism in most Muslim countries, why do Muslim nations suddenly become human rights champions in the face of a ban on travel to the U.S.? Why, for instance, does Turkey never criticizes the extreme shortcomings of freedoms in the Muslim world but calls the U.S. ban “racist?”

Why does the Iranian government think that Trump’s ban is a “gift to the [Muslim] extremists?” In claiming that travel bans would supposedly fuel extremism, how come Iran does not think that its own persecution of religious minorities is a “gift” to non-Muslims?

Such questions will probably remain unanswered in the Muslim world. Meanwhile, Muslims will keep on loving the “infidels” who support Muslim rights in non-Muslim lands, while keeping up intimidation of the same “infidels” in their own lands.

Only 18 out of 57 Muslim Nations Sign UN Coalition to Fight ISIS

November 21, 2016

Only 18 out of 57 Muslim Nations Sign UN Coalition to Fight ISIS

By Pamela Geller – on November 20, 2016

Source: Only 18 out of 57 Muslim Nations Sign UN Coalition to Fight ISIS – The Geller Report

Clearly a majority of Muslim nations do not want to fight against terror. On the contrary, they support jihad armies — in accordance with the jihadiic doctrine. “Soon shall we cast terror Into the hearts Of the unbelievers..”

The lip service that Muslim countries pay to Western elites is merely taqiya.
The Quran’s Verses of Violence – The Religion of Peace

Anger as less than A THIRD of Muslim nations sign up to coalition against ISIS
A TOP British official has taken aim at some Muslim nations during a meeting at the United Nations this week, slamming them for not clamping down on extremism.

By Siobhan McFadyen, Express UK, Nov 18, 2016  (thanks to Muslim Statistics)

Matthew Rycroft delivered a strongly worded speech at the UN this week

Matthew Rycroft delivered a strongly worded speech at the UN this week

It comes as it can be revealed just 18 out of 57 Muslim majority world states have signed up to a coalition against ISIS.

The UK’s permanent representative to the UN, Matthew Rycroft, delivered a strongly worded speech blasting what he called “evil groups” and saying not enough is being done.

The comments came as the UN general assembly supported a plan by the Islamic Development Bank to invest £7.2bn to tackle the cause of terror.

Suicide bombings are a daily issue around the globe
Suicide bombings are a daily issue around the globe.

The fact that these evil groups claim to represent Islam only makes this reality even more sickening.
– UN representative Matthew Rycroft

Britain is using its muscle at the UN to encourage more cooperation and has also pledged to invest £20m of taxpayers’ money to the Arab Women’s Enterprise Fund.

Mr Rycroft said: “One issue facing the OIC’s (Organisation of Islamic Cooperation) members, indeed all members of the UN, is the growing threat of extremist ideologies and violent extremism.

Just 18 out of 57 Muslim majority world states have signed up to a coalition against ISIS
Just 18 out of 57 Muslim majority world states have signed up to a coalition against ISIS

“Sadly, as we in this Council know only too well, this threat affects Muslim majority states in a truly disproportionate way – in Iraq, in Syria, in Libya, in so many places.

“Put simply and starkly, far more Muslim men, women and children have lost their lives at the hands of groups like Al Shabaab and Da’esh than any other faith or religion.

“The fact that these evil groups claim to represent Islam only makes this reality even more sickening.

“The United Kingdom is clear that we must tackle violent extremism in all its forms, whether radical Islam or neo-Nazism.”

An ISIS fighter is help by an Iraqi army official

An ISIS fighter is held by an Iraqi army official.
Worryingly, Mr Rycroft pointed out that just 18 of the 57 member states, with a collective population of over 1.6 billion – that makes up the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation which was founded in 1969 – are members of the Global Coalition against Da’esh.

It comes after the UK set up a Strategic Communications Cell to tackle terrorists in London last year, handing over an initial £10million.

He added: “It’s no coincidence that 18 members of the OIC are also members of the Global Coalition against Da’esh.

“Among them are of course our colleagues from Egypt and I want to pay tribute to the work of those two great Egyptian institutions, Al-Azhar and Dar Al-Ifta.

“These beacons of Islamic thinking help provide a narrative of tolerance that counters the hate preached by the likes of Da’esh.

A man takes a selfie in front of a fire from oil that has been set ablaze in the Qayyarah area
A man takes a selfie in front of a fire from oil that has been set ablaze in the Qayyarah area.

Iraqi soldiers look on as smoke rises fr

Video still of militants patrolling the streets of Mosul

Militants patrolling the streets of Mosul.
“The UK is committed to help spread that narrative, to showing the reality of Da’esh’s lies.

“That’s why we’re hosting the Coalition’s Communications Cell in London.

“It draws on the expertise of Coalition members, including our partners from the United Arab Emirates, to help counter the misrepresentation of Islam and its values by Da’esh.

“Countering an ideology is part about offering a competing narrative.

“But it’s also about delivering consequences for those who join Da’esh and it’s about supporting survivors of their crimes by giving them a voice and ending impunity.

“Da’esh accountability is a top priority for the UK and we are seeking UN action to preserve evidence of Da’esh’s crimes as a first step.”