#GoldStoneReport flashback! Bayefsky – Meet the UN’s anti-Israel ‘anti-discrimination’ czar, Navi Pillay

August 11, 2011
The UN’s top human rights official, Navi Pillay, attempted on Monday to block further defections from the UN’s racist “anti-racism” bash scheduled for New York City on Sept. 22. The United States, Canada, Israel, the Czech Republic, Italy and the Netherlands have already announced a boycott of “Durban III,” a UN event designed to “commemorate” the 10th anniversary of the UN anti-Semitic hatefest held in Durban, South Africa, in September 2001. Pillay said she was “disappointed” with these pullouts, labeling them a “political distraction.”
The barb was no accident for a UN high commissioner for human rights who has been distracted by her anti-Israel and anti-American agenda since taking office in 2008. Pillay is perhaps best known for her unremitting defense of the notorious Goldstone report and for having questioned the legality of the killing of Osama Bin Laden.
For Pillay, championing the Durban conference and its manifesto, the Durban Declaration, is a personal crusade. A native of Durban herself, shortly after her appointment she explained to a Geneva audience that the city’s mayor asked her to “rescue the name of Durban,” given its unflattering association with anti-Semitism. In response, she helped launch both Durban II in Geneva in 2009 and Durban III.
Unfortunately, her efforts to legitimize the Durban Declaration have little to do with the most basic of human rights: equality. The Durban Declaration charges only one country with racism among all 192 UN states – Israel. It calls Palestinians “victims” of Israeli racism, a 21st century reincarnation of the Zionism-is-racism libel. When Durban II ended with an “outcome document” that reaffirmed the Durban Declaration, Pillay gloated in a news conference on April 24, 2009, that Palestine is indeed “mentioned in the Durban Declaration and the word ‘reaffirm’ carries those paragraphs into this document.”
While Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the “anti-racism” crowd at Durban II, Pillay remained glued to her seat. UN videotape shows her simply watching democratic states walk out in disgust, although she and her secretariat colleagues had a copy of his Holocaust-denying speech in advance. Despite her later scramble, when under pressure, to distance herself from his comments, she issued a flowery thank-you to the Organization of the Islamic Conference for their role in Durban II – which included warm applause for Ahmadinejad.
Pillay’s enthusiasm for the Durban “anti-racism” agenda goes hand in hand with her single-minded pursuit of the demonization of Israel throughout her tenure. In January 2009, Pillay called for the creation of what became the Goldstone inquiry. In August 2009, she issued a report that lauded Hamas for having “made public statements that it is committed to respect international human rights and humanitarian law.” After Goldstone claimed that Israel had intentionally targeted civilians, Pillay said on Sept. 30, 2009, “I lend my full support to Justice Goldstone’s report and its recommendations.” Goldstone has since recanted the veracity of his slur; Pillay has not.
In July 2010, she made a rare appearance before the Security Council on “situations where the protection of civilians has been and remains of great concern” around the world – and made only two pleas to the council, both about Israel. Referring to Gaza, she said: “I urge the council . . . to ensure the lifting in full of the blockade” – which would stymie Israel’s ability to limit the flow of arms to Hamas. And she made this plea: “I urge the Security Council to support the recommendations of the UN Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict” – that is, the Goldstone report.
After a visit this past February to Israel, the West Bank and Gaza, she said this at her final Jerusalem news conference: “The clearest manifestation of institutional discrimination is the fact that during all my meetings with government and state officials, I do not believe I met a single Palestinian citizen of Israel.” She could have easily determined that Israeli Arabs are members of Israel’s parliament, in the diplomatic corps and on the Supreme Court. The discrimination that was apparently unclear to Pillay was the institutional charter of the Hamas government in Gaza, which calls for the annihilation of the Jewish citizens of Israel, and the Palestinian Authority’s refusal to recognize the right of a Jewish state to exist at all.
The antagonism between Pillay’s political priorities and the interests of Americans was most evident in her reaction to the death of Bin Laden. On May 3, Pillay expressed concern about his treatment. She demanded to know “the precise facts surrounding his killing” for the purpose of determining its legality. According to Pillay, “counterterrorism activity . . . in compliance with international law” means “you’re not allowed . . . to commit extrajudicial killings.” And this requirement would be satisfied only if the Americans had stuck by what she claimed was their “stated . . . intention . . . to arrest Bin Laden if they could.”
Her concern for Bin Laden was remarkable both for its flagrant contradiction with the laws of war justifying lethal force in his case, and for being three times as fast as her expressions of concern in March about the victims of lethal terror in Syria.
It is little wonder, therefore, that Pillay should be a fan of Durban III. On Monday, she confirmed that she will be coming to New York to participate in Durban III, which she described as an “important event . . . to combat discrimination.” Discrimination defined by the sponsors of discrimination itself.
Anne Bayefsky
For more United Nations coverage see www.EYEontheUN.org.

info@eyeontheun.org
August 10, 2011 For Immediate Release:
This article by Anne Bayefsky appears on NY Daily News

via calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com


The Archeology War

April 7, 2011

The Islamic Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (ISESCO) was founded in 1979 by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). It has three basic goals. The first is to spread a Saudi version of Koranic education throughout the Islamic world. The second is to publicize Islam to the non-Islamic world, both positively by touting Islamic civilization and its accomplishments—this it dubs “Dialogue among Civilizations”—and negatively, by protesting what it calls the “anti-Islamic campaign.” The third goal is to oppose the “Judaization of Al-Quds”—i.e., Jerusalem. To that end, a recent ISESCO meeting in Amman has bitterly attacked archeological projects in the Holy City conducted by “the Israeli occupation authorities . . . in full breach of the relevant international laws and conventions.” Citing supposedly “objective and well-documented information on the alteration of the Sacred City’s character and obliteration of its Arab and Islamic identity,” ISESCO vigorously denounced all such “attempts to Judaize Al-Quds Al-Sharif.”
Of course, Muslim claims that Jews are threatening Jerusalem have a long pedigree. So, in particular, do attacks on Israeli archeological practice there. In 1974, UNESCO—the international organization that ISESCO nominally apes—was forced by the Arab states to vote sanctions against Israeli digs in Jerusalem and to deny Israel membership in the organization’s European regional group. Although Israel was readmitted in 1977, UNESCO’s bias continued to be so blatant that in 1984 the U.S., UK, and others temporarily left the organization. Such a principled act is difficult to imagine today, even after UNESCO has declared Rachel’s Tomb to be a mosque and has condemned Israel for putting West Bank archeological sites on its list of National Heritage sites.
Is it necessary to point out that, in this area as in others, the true situation is the exact opposite of the one being portrayed? Israeli archeologists and the Israel Antiquities Authority have studied and preserved Islamic sites throughout the country. In the meantime, Islamic authorities and activists have exercised to the utmost their ability to deny and, if possible, obliterate evidence of any pre-modern Jewish connection to, in particular, the city of Jerusalem.
Islamic authorities have, for example, converted interior spaces of the Temple Mount into mosques and have removed immense amount of debris that happen to contain remains of earlier periods of Jewish occupation. Muslim “graves” have appeared overnight on disputed plots of land around Jerusalem. Efforts have been made to have Canadian authorities seize Dead Sea Scrolls being exhibited in Israel on the grounds that they are Palestinian cultural property illegally obtained. And, in a move as illogical as it is brazen, Palestinian intellectuals have attempted to manufacture a claim to Jerusalem that predates that of Jews by arguing descent from “Jebusites”—the city’s pre-Davidic residents whose presence is attested only in the Bible itself.
In the meantime, the international campaign continues on its course. In a Google search, the term “Judaization of Jerusalem” yields over 100,000 results and merits a separate Wikipedia entry that patiently explains its various meanings. In the narrow sense, Judaization signifies any effort to demonstrate or suggest that Jews have a historical connection to Jerusalem—a connection explicitly and repeatedly denied by Palestinian propaganda. In a broader sense, it encompasses any change whatsoever to the economic, political, demographic, architectural, or other fabric of Jerusalem that can be construed as in Israel’s interest. Archeology is suspect prima facie, especially in the Old City, the Western Wall area, and the City of David.
Note that the term is “Judaization,” not “Zionization” or some other coinage. In all its usages, “Judaization” is an accusation against Jews, not just Israelis, and anything that demonstrates Jewish antiquity in the city is by definition Judaization.
And now ISESCO and other non-governmental organizations are upping the ante and planning to broaden their campaign by bringing actual lawsuits against Israel in international courts, notably the UN’s world court in The Hague. According to Ziad Saad, director of Jordan’s department of antiquities, “We aim to gather sound scientific evidence for politicians to take up the case at the international level.” This “evidence” will support the charge that Israel is guilty of, in the words of the Jordanian archeologist Moawiyah Ibrahim, using “biblical texts to support their national narrative and disregard[ing] the Arab-Islamic heritage.”
This latest move is part of the widening conduct of “lawfare” against Israel, whereby any and every international venue is exploited to investigate, isolate, and indict the country and its citizens. Manipulating the practices of “international jurisdiction,” which permits local officials of non-governmental entities to bring suit in European courts, the campaign has begun to undermine the ability of Israeli military and political leaders to set foot on the European continent. That Arab archeologists are following suit is disturbing but, one supposes, hardly surprising.
How long will it be before Israeli archeologists are unable to get off a plane in London lest they be served with a subpoena initiated by a Palestinian NGO?
Existing international organizations and “international law” appear nearly powerless before the combination of Arab and Muslim pressure and the behavior of Western officials—and scholars—cravenly or eagerly falling into line. Armed with resources provided by European and other donors, the criminalization of everything Israeli proceeds. ISESCO, for its part, has the full backing of the Saudi regime and the OIC, whose multifarious organs reach into every Muslim country and most non-Muslim ones. Its relentless positioning of the Arab-Israeli conflict as a paramount Islamic cause shows no sign of yielding to the “Dialogue among Civilizations.”
It is a truism that Israeli archeological practice can be legitimately criticized, not least for the murky relations between the state and private entities undertaking development in the West Bank. It is a bigger truism that such failings pale into insignificance when compared with the wanton destruction of antiquities and the abuse of people in the name of both archeology and development that go on regularly in China, Iran, Egypt, or Saudi Arabia. But such considerations are also irrelevant. As is well known, one square foot in Jerusalem produces exponentially more hysteria than hundreds of square miles elsewhere. If everything that happens in Israel is “political,” the world revolves around Jerusalem as it does around no other city.

The reason is, precisely, the fact of Jewish control.
When Jordan or the Ottoman empire controlled Jerusalem, the attention paid by the outside world, even to well-documented instances of anti-Christian persecution, was intermittent at best. Now, thanks to the city’s elevation as the Muslim cause célèbre, nothing goes unnoticed. And therein may lie the explanation for the latest, unrestrained alarm of ISESCO and its scholars. As recent archeological expeditions in Jerusalem expose more and more evidence of an ancient Jewish presence in the city, the worst fears of these scholars threaten to materialize. To protect their own investment in decades of official denial, they are acting quickly to mobilize the Islamic and Western worlds to help shut it all down.
Alex Joffe is a research scholar with the Institute for Jewish and Community Research. He last wrote for Jewish Ideas Daily on the state of Jewish studies.

Astounding new evidence has been unearthed in Israel that could confirm the biblical story of King David.

Until now, almost nothing has been found  that would prove the biblical account of a shepherd boy from the 10th century BC who slew the giant Goliath and went on to become the King of Israel who founded Jerusalem.

But today Hebrew University archaeology professor Yosef Garfinkel announced the discovery of a tiny, but potentially invaluable, piece of pottery at the site of the ruins of an ancient fortified city south-west of Jerusalem dated to the time of King David.


Enlarge

 
Proof: Yossi Garfinkel displays the ceramic shard bearing a Hebrew inscription that may be evidence King David slew Goliath

Yossi Garfinkel displays the ceramic shard bearing a Hebrew inscription that may be evidence supporting the biblical story of David and Goliath

Garfinkel said that it carried the earliest-known Hebrew inscription, some 850 years  earlier than the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Scholars are still trying to decipher the full text of the inscription, but Garfinkel said they are excited at the prospect of a link to David because they have already translated the words for “king,” “judge,” and  “slave” , which he said suggested it was some sort of official note from the time of his reign.

Until now, scholars have been unable to say whether King David was indeed the  heroic, psalm-composing monarch depicted in the Bible or the local and unimportant leader of a small tribe.


Enlarge

 
The archaeological site called Elah Fortress, or Khirbet Qeiyafa, seen in an undated aerial photograph, where the shard was found

The archaeological site called Elah Fortress, or Khirbet Qeiyafa, seen in an undated aerial photograph, where the shard was found

Only one biblical-era inscription with the words “House of David” has ever been  discovered, leading some scholars to question whether King David existed at all.

The pottery fragment was inscribed with five rows of text in black ink divided by black lines written in an early Hebrew-Canaanite script.

Archaeologists also found lamps, pottery jars and other items. Carbon-14 tests  carried out at Oxford University dated them to the 10th century BC, the era according to the Old Testament of King David and his son Solomon, who built the Temple in Jerusalem.

The ruins of the Elah Valley fortress was discovered  in 2003 near the modern Israeli city of Beit Shemesh in the Judean Hills, south-west of  Jerusalem. The huge complex is spread over nearly six acres and surrounded by a 700-metre long city wall built with stones weighing up to eight tons each. 

Bible come true? David with the head of Goliath by William Daniels

Bible come true? David with the head of Goliath by William Daniels


Enlarge

 
Yossi Garfinkel is seen at the excavation site

Yossi Garfinkel is seen at the excavation site

Detailed excavations began only earlier this year.

The fortress would have controlled the ancient trading route from Jerusalem to the coast and overlooks the plain where David engaged in his legendary mortal combat with Goliath, giant champion of the rival Philistines.

Goliath’s home town of Gath was unearthed just a few miles away to the south.

“The chronology and geography of Elah Fortress create a unique meeting point between the history, historiography and origins of the early Davidic Kingdom,” said Garfinkel.

“This is the oldest Judean city  uncovered to date, and its very construction has unprecedented implications on our understanding of this era.” 

Garfinkel said the sophistication and size of the city suggested it was part of  a strong, centrally-planned kingdom.

It has been a busy week for archaeologists searching for King David and his family. In Jerusalem, a researcher said she had found an ancient water drain mentioned in the Bible as the route used by David’s forces to capture the city  from the Jebusites.

In Jordan, scholars said they had uncovered an ancient  copper excavation site that tests showed could be the legendary King Solomon’s Mines.


Beheading Ourselves Over Islam

April 5, 2011

War On Terror: What can the U.S. do to quell the violent spasms of Islam? Promote Islam, naturally. At least that’s the thinking of this administration. It’s now official foreign policy.

President Obama’s top Muslim envoy has been overseas encouraging devotion to Islam, including in terror hot spots like Afghanistan. In fact, Rashad Hussain, U.S. special envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference, just returned from Afghanistan, where he told locals the antidote to Islamic violence “is Islam itself.”
“I am of the opinion that one of the strongest tools that you can use to counter radicalization and violent extremism is Islam itself, because Islam rejects violent extremism,” Hussain said during a speech in Kabul.
Afghans responded to his message by slaughtering a dozen innocent United Nations workers in the name of Islam. Stirred by mosque sermons, a mob of thousands overran a U.N. compound in northern Afghanistan following Friday prayers. They sawed off the heads of two guards before killing the others, including Norwegian and Swedish nationals, inside. It was Afghanistan’s deadliest attack on U.N. personnel. The worshippers also burned American flags and effigies of Obama — all to defend the honor of a single, paperback copy of a Quran torched by a quack U.S. preacher thousands of miles away in Florida. So far, more than 20 have died in the rioting.

Islamic law calls for vengeance against anybody who insults Islam, its prophet or its holy book. Islamic law is enshrined in the post-Taliban Afghan constitution. Yet Rashad, a devout Muslim, says the Muslim faith is “key” to the administration’s strategy to turn Muslims away from violence.
“We see that as one of the key elements of a strategy to address this type of violence,” he said. By “we,” he means the Obama administration. So it’s now official policy to try to douse the Islamic fire of jihad by pouring more fuel on it. This is breathtaking.
It’s also at odds with what the co-chairmen of the 9/11 Commission — including Democrat lion Lee Hamilton — recently recommended in their follow-up report on homegrown terror, “Assessing the Terrorist Threat: A Report of the Bipartisan Policy Center’s National Security Preparedness Group.” It found that Islam was catalyzing terrorists abroad and inside America’s Muslim community. And it scolded U.S. leaders for pretending otherwise. Still, Hussain insists: “When it comes to the problem of violent extremism, Islam is not the problem.”
Who is this top adviser on all things Islamic? A Muslim activist, Hussain helped draft Obama’s conciliatory Cairo speech to Muslims. Before joining the White House, he regularly spoke to Brotherhood front groups and defended Brotherhood leaders like Sami al-Arian. (Hussain first denied defending the convicted terrorist, claiming he was misquoted, but recanted after Politico.com produced a tape-recording of his remarks.) The Brotherhood is a worldwide jihadist movement whose credo says, “Jihad is our way, and death for the glory of Allah is our greatest ambition.” Yet this Brotherhood sympathizer believes it doesn’t promote violence?
He appears more interested in promoting Islam than representing U.S. interests to the Muslim world in a war on Islamic terror. And his influence is strong. Even in the wake of the U.N. beheadings, the U.S. refuses to condemn the beheaders or the jihadi doctrine that justifies their barbarism. Instead, the administration — through a statement by Gen. David Petraeus — condemned “any disrespect to the Muslim faith,” effectively apologizing for the exercise of First Amendment rights, offensive or not. Such messages only validate the warped moral and legal code of Shariah Islam, while empowering the troglodytes who enforce it.
President Bush may have mouthed pleasant platitudes about Islam being a “religion of peace” and so on. But he wasn’t naive enough to promulgate it as an anti-terror strategy. This president and his Muslim advisers, on the other hand, are doing just that. And they’re bound to strengthen the hand of the enemy.

The OIC is Islamophobic

March 28, 2011

Anyone who truly knows Islam and has the courage to be honest about it, Must confess that Islam its self is guilty of disbelieverophobia this is a simple fact the Qur’an and hadith’s in fact are so full of phobic fear and hatred of disbelief and disbelievers, that they command the utmost evil on those who disbelieve and have persecuted and killed disbelievers sense the very formation of Islam.

Just wondering !!

In fact Islam is so phobic and hate filled towards the disbelief that it will even turn on its own, In witch hunts against those accused of disbelief the Qur’an commands horrible dreadful tortures and murder and even the ultimate evil of eternal hell, for those who disbelieve in the right of Muhammad that ancient dead barbarian of olds right to rule the lives of the living.
Muhammad was a horrible man and a brutal tyrant who not only threatened peoples very lives to get his way, But he threatened there eternity as well, insisted they would live for ever but in an agony greater then any could ever comprehend an agony far worse then death could ever be,, , So intense is this phobia of disbelievers and disbelief that Islam waged war against the disbelievers, and called it holy. The Qur’an that hate manual against the disbelievers so filled with phobic hate is praised as Holy by believers {in Islam } everywhere !
Disbelievers have suffered every manor of persecution at the hand of believers because of the disbeliever ophobia preaching in Islam, and yet few are they who dare to stand up for the persecuted disbelievers. In fact one of Islam’s newest ploys Is a new word created solely for the cause of persecution of the disbelievers, The word Islamophobia A word which by definition and a good look at the history of Islam and the words and deeds of Islam today,, Prove the word more readily applies to Muslims then it does the disbelievers! Islamophobia is an irrational fear of Islam, The OIC is the Organization of the Islamic Conference a wealthy and powerful organization of Islamic nations, In constant witch hunts , persecutes those who disbelieve even touts the world Islamophobia like a weapon to be used against any who would defended the dreaded disbelievers .
Yet a close inspection of the OIC will show that they themselves are so phobic of the disbelievers they have become Islamophobic so afraid of the threats there beloved Muhammad made against disbelief that they persecute believers out of witch hunt type fears of those who disbelieve.
Islamophobia irrational fear of Islam, The general secretary of the OIC
Mr. Abdula Manafi Mutualo
Secretary of the Islamophobia Observatory
and Culture and Social Affairs’ Officer
OIC General Secretariat
Madinah Road, P.O. Box 178
Jeddah -21411
Saudi Arabia
Tel: +96626515222 Ext: 1714

Email: abdmanafi@oic-oci.org
………………………………….
Is so Islamophobic and disbelieverophobic That he s from the Islamic nation of Saudi Arabia a land known the world over for its persecution of the disbeliever and its persecution of Shia Muslims as well as other muslims, Yet Mr Abdula Manafi , Is so phobic of Islam that he fears that truth which might offend Islam,
These people are so terrified so phobic of Islam that they fear truth its self if truth might offend Islam, After all with Islam;s history of extreme hatred and violence even threat of eternal damnation ,, Who can blame these people for being such phobics ? Lets fact it there Qur’an its self demands there fear and demands terror as well they can not deny that. In fact every nation in the OIC has been guilty of phobic driven persecution of muslims and disbelievers alike. But the OIC is a very wealthy and powerful tyrant who’s extreme phobia enhanced bias has had it demanding global laws to protect it from any truth which might offend the dreaded Islam…Because they know all to well the evils there Muhammad and there Allah and there Islam are capable of. And they are not unlike other much smaller Islamic groups around the world.. I have often heard the pot calling the kettle black phrase, But Islam’s hypocrisy on this one is far ,far greater then that. So great has the hypocrisy been, That millions have suffered for it. Yet still these cowards dare not hold Islam responsible for its own sins and continue to make scapegoats of innocent men women and children. And they have the money and the power to do it.. But only because we disbelievers have let them get away with it after all disbelievers still out number believers!


Israel as a Jewish state is wrong, 60 Islamic States are fine

September 24, 2010


CiF writer Omar Rahman penned a quite predictable anti-Israel piece on Sept 22, criticizing Israel’s request to be acknowledged as a Jewish state (while seemingly not bothered by the 60 or so nations who insist on being called Islamic states.)  His piece, not surprisingly, produced this boilerplate “Zionism = Racism” diatribe by a commenter called, yes, “Donkey Logic”.

For anyone interested, here is the list of officially Islamic states:

Meanwhile, at the U.N. Human Rights Council

September 17, 2010

Anne Bayefsky:

Wednesday in Geneva during the current session of the U.N. Human Rights Council, the Obama administration became a willing participant in the U.N.’s imposition of an apartheid-style ban on representatives of the state of Israel. Despite the promises made by the administration that by joining the Council the United States would not become part of the problem, U.S. Ambassador to the Council Eileen Donahoe chose to attend and fully participate in a meeting that deliberately excluded anyone representing the Jewish state.
Israel is the only U.N. state not permitted to be a full member of any of the U.N.’s five regional groups. Throughout the Human Rights Council sessions, these groups hold key planning meetings in which countries negotiate and share important information behind closed doors. Even the Palestinian Authority, though not a state, is permitted into the Asian regional group. Israelis are allowed into the Western European and Others Group (WEOG) in some parts of the U.N. But WEOG members have chosen to exclude them totally in all of their meetings associated with the Human Rights Council.
Rather than refusing to participate until such outrageous discrimination comes to an end, Obama administration representatives walked through the door slammed in the face of Israelis and made themselves comfortable.
While Israelis are left standing in the hall during the Council’s regional group meetings, this week for the first time Libya took its seat as a full-fledged Council member. Other full voting members of the U.N.’s lead human rights body include such model citizens as Saudi Arabia, China, Cuba, Russia and Kyrgyzstan.
Joining the Human Rights Council was one of President Obama’s first foreign policy decisions. He knew then – what is still true today – that the Council has adopted more resolutions and decisions condemning the state of Israel than all other 191 U.N. members combined….
But rather than refusing to lend legitimacy to a body with a deeply entrenched bias, the president chose to join and direct U.S. taxpayer dollars its way, claiming that he would be the Council’s great reformer.
On Monday, writing in The New York Times, Ambassador Donahoe repeated the claim that U.S. engagement filled “a vacuum of leadership” and alleged that “the council is engaged in a serious self-reflection exercise…”
On the very same day as Donahoe’s op-ed appeared, the 57 members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) put the president in his place….

Flag of Organization of the Islamic Conference (of which the PLO was a founding member)
Oic

Where is the U.N. and U if U can’t take part? No Where

We needn’t have the world in pieces
Cause the world’s best hope for peace is
The UN plus U, the UN plus U
…We’ll fight aggression
Lick diseases
Stand for peace but not appeasers
The UN plus U, the UN plus U

America to Stop Criticism of Islam wth Whitehouse cooperation with the #GoldStone Report originator: Organization for Islamic Conference

June 26, 2010

Obama’s Islamic Envoy: U.S. Will Work with Organization for Islamic Conference to Stop Criticism of Islam

(Weekly Standard) Rashad Hussain, America’s special envoy to the Organization for the Islamic Conference (OIC), the Saudi-based body formed in 1969 to “protect” Jerusalem from the Israelis, announced a new title this week for President Barack Obama. According to Hussain, Obama is America’s “Educator-in-Chief on Islam.”

Obama has called for references to “Islamic terrorism” and “jihadism” to be expunged from the official vocabulary employed by his administration, and has pronounced last year’s Fort Hood massacre to be unrelated to Islam. As the president has assured the world, terrorism is anti-Islamic and the term “jihad” has been misused. Thus Obama presumes not only to act as “educator” on Islam to non-Muslim Americans, but to define the religion for its own adherents.

click for story via thejidf.org