Try a little thought experiment. What would have happened in this
country during the Cold War if the Soviet Union successfully
neutralized anti-communists opposed to the Kremlin’s plans for
world domination?
Of course, Moscow strove to discredit those in America and elsewhere
who opposed its totalitarian agenda – especially after Sen.
Joseph McCarthy’s excesses made it fashionable to vilify patriots
by accusing them of believing communists were “under every
bed.”
But what if the USSR and its ideological soul-mates in places like
China, North Korea, Cuba, Eastern Europe and parts of Africa had been
able to criminalize efforts to oppose their quest for the triumph of
world communism? What if it had been an internationally prosecutable
offense even to talk about the dangers inherent in communist rule and
the need to resist it?
The short answer is that history might very well have come out
differently. Had courageous anti-communists been unable accurately and
forcefully to describe the nature of that time’s enemy –
and to work against the danger posed by its repressive, seditious
program, the Cold War might well have been lost.
Flash forward to today. At the moment, another totalitarian ideology
characterized by techniques and global ambitions strikingly similar to
those of yesteryear’s communists is on the march. It goes by
varying names: “Islamofascism,” “Islamism,”
“jihadism” or “radical,”
“extremist” or “political Islam.” Unlike the
communists, however, adherents to this ideology are making
extraordinary strides in Western societies toward criminalizing those
who dare oppose the Islamist end-state – the imposition of brutal
Shariah Law on Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
Consider but a few indicators of this ominous progress:
* In March, the 57 Muslim-state Organization of the Islamic Conference
(OIC) prevailed upon the United Nations Human Rights Council to adopt a
resolution requiring the effective evisceration of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. Henceforth, the guaranteed right of free
expression will not extend to any criticism of Islam, on the grounds
that it amounts to an abusive act of religious discrimination. A UN
Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression has been charged with
documenting instances in which individuals and media organizations
engage in what the Islamists call “Islamophobia.” Not to be
outdone, the OIC has its own “ten-year program of action”
which will monitor closely all Islamophobic incidents and defamatory
statements around the world.
* Monitoring is just the first step. Jordan’s Prosecutor General
has recently brought charges against Dutch Parliamentarian Geert
Wilders. According to a lawsuit, “Fitna” –
Wilders’ short documentary film that ties certain Koranic
passages to Islamist terrorism – is said to have slandered and
insulted the Prophet Mohammed, demeaned Islam and offended the feelings
of Muslims in violation of the Jordanian penal code. Mr. Wilders has
been summoned to Amman to stand trial and, if he fails to appear
voluntarily, international warrants for his arrest will be issued.
Zakaria Al-Sheikh, head of the “Messenger of Allah Unites Us
Campaign” which is the plaintiff in the Jordanian suit,
reportedly has “confirmed that the [prosecutor’s action] is
the first step towards setting in place an international law
criminalizing anyone who insults Islam and the Prophet Mohammed.”
In the meantime, his campaign is trying to penalize the nations that
have spawned “Islamophobes” like Wilders and the Danish
cartoonists by boycotting their exports – unless the producers
publicly denounce the perpetrators both in Jordan and in their home
media.
Unfortunately, it is not just some companies that are submitting to
this sort of coercion – a status known in Islam as
“dhimmitude.” Western officials and governmental entities
appear increasingly disposed to go along with such efforts to mutate
warnings about Shariah law and its adherents from “politically
incorrect” to “criminally punishable” activity.
For example, in Britain, Canada and even the United States, the
authorities are declining to describe the true threat posed by Shariah
Law and are using various techniques to discourage – and in some
cases, prosecute – those who do. We are witnessing the spectacle
of authors’ books being burned, ministers prosecuted, documentary
film-makers investigated and journalists hauled before so-called
“Human Rights Councils” on charges of offending Muslims,
slandering Islam or other “Islamophobic” conduct. Jurists
on both sides of the Atlantic are acceding to the insinuation of
Shariah law in their courts. And Wall Street is increasingly joining
other Western capital markets in succumbing to the seductive Trojan
Horse of “Shariah-Compliant Finance.”
Let’s be clear: The Islamists are trying to establish a kind of
Catch-22: If you point out that they seek to impose a barbaric,
repressive and seditious Shariah Law, you are insulting their faith and
engaging in unwarranted, racist and bigoted fear-mongering. On the
other hand, pursuant to Shariah, you must submit to that
theo-political-legal program. If you don’t, you can legitimately
be killed. It is not an irrational fear to find that prospect
unappealing. And it is not racist or bigoted to decry and oppose
Islamist efforts to bring it about – ask the anti-Islamist
Muslims who are frequently accused of being Islamophobes!
If we go along with our enemies’ demands to criminalize
Islamophobia, we will mutate Western laws, traditions, values and
societies beyond recognition. Ultimately, today’s totalitarian
ideologues will triumph where their predecessors were defeated.
To avoid such a fate, those who love freedom must oppose the seditious
program the Islamists call Shariah – and all efforts to impose
its 1st Amendment-violating blasphemy, slander and libel laws on us in
the guise of preventing Western Islamophobia.
