Tuesday, July 05, 2011

OIC Chants Again: “Geert Wilders is a Meanie”

Someone in the Netherlands and another person in Belgium sent a link to this wonderful revelation re the OIC’s new findings. Can you say “here comes the bumf”?

Organization of Islamic Cooperation
The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) has denounced anti-Islamic acts in the Netherlands, blaming a number of Dutch politicians for supporting Islamophobia.

The foreign ministers of OIC member states issued a statement during a Tuesday meeting in the Kazakh capital, Astana, condemning acts of Islamophobia in the Netherlands.

The communiqué also expressed concern over the hateful and provocative remarks made by a number of Dutch politicians against Islam and Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).

PBUH fer sure. I don’t mind when they “express concern”; express away, but do it in your own enclave in, umm…Kazah.

The clear and present danger these oligarchs present is the millions of dollars they use to buy our prostitutes of “Higher Education”. Elite American academe sell itself and its Endowed Chairs to primitive, brutal theocracies, creating Kafkaesque “freedom” of “speech” which is unfree and mostly consists of silently holding one’s tongue unless engaged in pimping for Islam in some form or other.

In American colleges (“university” is just another piece of language inflation, one to avoid when possible) free speech is whatever the PC/MC mavens say it is. And you can guess how limited is their idea of what’s permissible. David Horowitz may not speak; Robert Spencer takes his life in his hands; Mark Steyn anyone? And Kathy Shaidle, for heaven’s sake! Those are the names I found in a brief Google trip.

Here’s the formula, more or less (obviously omit my quote marks):

  • take the name of your particular favorite right wing notable,
  • add a phrase like ‘ speech is cancelled’, or,
  • ‘is banned at university’
  • stick it in Google and you’re off to the races.

You can add ‘Code Pink’ or ‘Muslim students protest’ and see what further enrichment you get. Predictable, dreary bumf. All part of the PC/MC indoctrination muzzle, paid with your petro-dollars flowing into the pockets of the OIC.

I randomly chose Michelle Malkin as my notable personage. [this choice wasn’t entirely random. I admire her principles, as I’ve said before] That woman must be one thick-skinned crusader. The hatred toward her drools all the way down the page. What I saw went back at least ten years, though I’m sure the undocumented incidents started well before then.

Here’s a recent, obscure story on a Malkin speech given April last. According to this young blogger’s report the reaction to Malkin’s visit was limited to tearing down or defacing some posters. That’s so tame I’m flabbergasted. You can infer from the post that the miscreant was a law student. Perhaps he was enrolled in “Tearing & Defacing Posters 201”, a law school requirement taken from the Alinsky Obama handbook. Maybe that was part of his practicum?

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Here’s an organization that monitors and intervenes in some of the most egregious cases of Speech Stifle (obviously they’re not being funded by the OIC).

FIRE’s mission has several prongs. One is to fight for hapless professors who step out of line and pay for their “mistake” with the loss of their livelihoods and reputation. Here’s an example, their lead story of the moment:

FIRE has asked University of Oregon (UO) President Richard Lariviere to reverse the damage to free speech and academic freedom that UO caused when it dropped American Sign Language (ASL) instructor Peter Quint in the middle of the term without a hint of due process, all because of a comment he made during class about students who were violating a class policy.

Quint, who is deaf, had been appointed as an ASL instructor for the 2009-2010 academic year, and his appointment was renewed for 2010-2011, with a reasonable expectation of renewal for the coming year. A small number of students in his ASL 203 had been failing to follow the class policy stated on the syllabus, which was that “it is expected that all attempts at communication be made visually.” Although he had taken steps to address the problem, they continued to violate the policy.

On May 4, Quint opened his ASL 203 class with a personal story meant to emphasize the need to be able to communicate across barriers and show respect in a “foreign” environment such as an ASL classroom. Quint related his experience in Pakistan when his ability to communicate with others in a foreign environment had helped him escape threats against his life. In an email to College of Education Dean Michael Bullis the next day, Quint explained that the story involved --

a situation in Pakistan where I had to deal with a threat involving a group of Pashtun tribesmen, one of whom had a gun. It was all in reference to one of the goals of ASL classes; that is to create in students a strength of heart from active practice and involvement in a “foreign” environment.

So, that was the context for what came next. Being deaf himself, Quint had made it clear to his students, both during lectures and in his syllabus, that respectful communication in class required that all communication be visible. Yet, later during that very class, some students again violated this policy. In frustration he expressed, “Do you want me to take a gun out and shoot you in the head so you understand what I am talking about? I had to practice being respectful in Pakistan otherwise I would have been shot. Can you practice the same respect here?”

Quint later emailed his students to apologize, but it was too late…

It’s always too late in a fearful knee-jerk environment such as the stifled air you’ll find in our American college soviet system. The professor said “gun” and “shoot you”. Pardon me, he didn’t say those words, he signed them. He used an appropriate marker to denote his growing frustration with the students’ rude refusals to abide by the basic class rule, a rule created for the sake of courtesy toward the deaf, which included this teacher.

But students run things and they don’t need no stinkin’ rules. Oh sure, the administration’s byzantine and ever-metastasizing PC rules - those real rules are learned by osmosis and most of them internalized by fifth grade. All the more reason to club this professor for his rule. They did it because they knew they could get away with it. Think of it as a relief valve for the ignorant.

By the way, notice the terms of this fellow’s employment. He’s a contract worker - using the term “professor” was misleading. He’s an “instructor”, hired from year-to-year. The only thing lower on the totem pole is a teaching assistant. Would this kind of humiliation have happened to a tenured professor? No way. The students aren’t stupid: they know who matters versus those they can trample with impunity. They may not know the term “Mandarin Class” but they recognize its members on sight.

Some students can go through all four years of college without ever being in contact with a fully tenured mandarin. The burdens of the college mandarins are light; their every need accommodated. Their salaries (and eventual pensions) are as inflated as their view of themselves. They are a large part of the financial burdens bankrupting our states. The (now-retired) mandarin who wrote that essay (linked in this paragraph) summed it all in his title: “Fat City:Thank you, Illinois taxpayers, for my cushy life“.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Going back to language, notice the FIRE report above. That instructor is DEAF, he is not hearing-impaired. Many deaf people resent the PC/MC terminology, just as many black Americans are impatient with the various terms foisted on them. And ask an American Indian about the myriad of PC pretzel-phrases loaded onto his unwilling back. Or hers. Only those folks who are in the name game for money give a darn. The rest have a life.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Meanwhile, back in Kazah at “the 38th OIC ministerial conference” the OIC oligarchies maunder on about Mr. Wilders:

Meanwhile, OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu has issued a separate statement in which he condemned Dutch rightist lawmaker Geert Wilders for his insulting remarks against Islam, Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), and his wives.

Yeah, a great big PBUH for the pedophile slave-owner and his poor harem.

I’m not going to chase down the OIC’s 2009/10 Annual Report but I’m sure it’s still somewhere on their website. I know because I had the Baron download it for me so I could RTWT (read the whole thing). It’s Bumf All the Way Down. However, there are some nuggets here and there, small inadvertent transparencies that permit you to see how truly paranoid they are.

Here’s the most memorable example (“memorable” as in I was fascinated and appalled). Somehow these leaders think…hold on for it: the Swiss Minaret ban caused Geert Wilders. In other words if those evil Swiss hadn’t voted out the minarets, then Wilders never could have succeeded. Or maybe he wouldn’t even exist, who knows?

The OIC was assured by the elite Swiss and their media echoes that the ban would never ever be voted in. Wouldn’t happen. Couldn’t happen. And then when it did happen? Well, they’ve spent countless hours waylaying Swiss officials at the UN, at conferences, in meetings at Berne - every place Swiss officials live and move and have their being - to tell them to reverse the law. It’s simple, all you have to do is…repeal the law those stupid infidels chose.

They do the same in Denmark, still trying All you have to do is… punish Jyllands Posten for those MoToons.

Wash, rinse, repeat.

They continue in this behavior because they honestly, truly do not understand how democracy works. It.will.not.compute. due to their lack of experience with the rule of law:

  • The OIC is used to UN and the endless ways in which it can be manipulated. Here’s the penultimate sentence in that OIC public relations report:

    UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon described Wilders’ movie as “offensively anti-Islamic.”

  • The OIC is used to American colleges, which can be bought by the dozen.
  • The OIC is accustomed to buying politicians and influence peddlers.
  • The OIC operates under PBUH rule and works toward the day when you will, too.

So Mr. Wilders is still going strong, and they still spend their money on bumf and terror. Works for them.

Let’s just keep on pushing back against Sharia at every opportunity. If you understand the rule of law then Sharia won’t make any sense to you, at least initially. But as you penetrate into the nihilist world view underlying this 7th century(ff) compendium of minutiae and mayhem, its rationale will become all too clear.

Thank heavens for Geert Wilders and the few brave leaders who are making a stand against Islam. We owe them.


Zenster said...

Wouldn't it be a terrible loss to this world if, during a full plenary session of the OIC, the entire building managed to mysteriously collapse, killing all inside?

I might even manage to squeeze out a tear. Then again, I might not.

gsw said...

I still don't understand.
I am anti-islamic because I am a female and an atheist and it's mutual.
Why is this wrong?

1389 said...

As long as US and Canadian colleges and universities (self-styled or otherwise) can be bought and paid for by the OIC, then those selfsame colleges and universities do not need OUR money.

They don't need our tax money, either directly, or through grants and guaranteed student loans.

They don't need our alumni contributions and bequests.

They don't need our tuition money. We can wait until the prices come way down and some thorough housecleaning takes place.

Oh, and that's not all:

No organization that takes money from the OIC should have tax-exempt status. Instead, the organization should be required to register as a foreign agent, which is exactly what it is.

bewick said...

Perhaps OT but I think it is useful in this discussion.
I have just finished reading the autobiography of Kate Adie - "The Kindness of Strangers". I highly recommend it. Am I in love with Kate? Well I certainly could have been (we are of similar age) but she left the North East of England the very year I moved here. She now lives in my original stamping grounds and I in hers. We’ve swapped and missed. My loss , but perhaps not hers.
Kate was one of the main BBC TV reporters in conflict zones during the 1970s-90s
OT . Much of the biography concerns her early local radio and local TV career. It reveals much about the BBC at that time and the more recent changes. A topic of justified concern on GoV from time to time.
The rest though contains seriously insightful comment, amidst the tales of derring do, and, I have to say, undeservedly self deprecating. Would that I had her cojones. (PG13?)
She never once mentions the OIC or Islam ideology as such. She does though describe in some detail her "exploits" in Bosnia, the Gulf, Libya, Beirut, and Beijing. She was shot 4 times but fortunately only sustained minor injury. I never heard that from the BBC.
She was shown great hospitality by some Muslims and total disrespect by others. She was sometimes appalled that at the end of a very hospitable encounter with her educated, urbane, and sophisticated hosts. they would sometimes reveal their true, and ideologically mindless, real (and Islamic) thoughts. The “peasant” class were normally simply hospitable even though Muslims. Muslims who gave her far more respect than Western domiciled Muslims would concede, or Saudis et al.
She reveals an obvious hatred of the Saudis, and their totally medieval and supremacist attitudes , during preparations for the Gulf War. (a warning - she was less than polite about US troops and their officers – “dim” being a repeated comment. She didn’t respect the Dutch much either).
Her comments on Gaddafi reveal a madman with no strategy or much else. She clearly understands rather better than the politicians, or generals, what Gaddafi is about – or rather not about. He seems to have considered her his confidante. He even telephoned her , when she was in Saudi, to ask which side he should support during the first Gulf War. Kate doesn’t lie.
In her book Kate doesn’t seem to “join the dots” on Islam but I have absolutely no doubt that she did. Nor did she even mention the OIC. Perhaps she’d never heard of it. She’d often “not heard” . I am quite sure though that she would have robust views but doesn’t wish to become controversial.
Remind me. Aren’t Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Libya, Bosnia, and others members of the 57 state OIC?
Read and enjoy the book and gain some serious insight from a brave and intelligent woman who will, without meaning to, confirm your worst fears about the OIC and it’s driver – Islam.
What did I gain apart from a much increased respect for Kate Adie? Well I probably gained that Muslims are highly varied and the highly educated ones may just be the more dangerous. I also reckoned that Kate had massively held back on what she knew – but then she had to sign the Official Secrets Act (as did I)

bewick said...

the Dutch? Well their UN troops stood watching, doing zilch, whilst Kate was being assaulted and threatened with death (by a Muslim of course). A British Officer rescued her.

Zenster said...

1389: No organization that takes money from the OIC should have tax-exempt status. Instead, the organization should be required to register as a foreign agent, which is exactly what it is.

Brilliant, 1389! This is the sort of new thinking that is needed as we move to expel all Islamic infiltration from Western societies.

bewick said...

well now Zenster. How would you achieve the total repatriation of 3 generations of Muslims without the charge of ethnic cleansing?
Most Europeans would be seriously pleased if it happened but it won't. At least not without Governments being deposed and mob rule prevailing.
Civil wars in other words.

Zenster said...

bewick: How would you achieve the total repatriation of 3 generations of Muslims without the charge of ethnic cleansing?

My point regarding "Islamic infiltration" was more about shari'a creep into our governments and laws.

Most Europeans would be seriously pleased if it happened but it won't. At least not without Governments being deposed and mob rule prevailing.
Civil wars in other words.

And your point is?

Most of us are well aware that Europe is headed straight towards civil war, preferably sooner than later, before Muslims are in even greater numbers and many nations on the Continent have converted over to near-total police states.

Incidentally, getting rid of a violent, seditious segment of your population that has only the worst of intent does not qualify as "ethnic cleansing".


Ousting supremacist Muslims of all backgrounds, origins and colors is a matter of simple self-preservation. "Ethnic cleansing" has nothing to do with it. That is an activity which Islam is far more prone to engage in.

1389 said...


You understand where I'm coming from! I appreciate your support very much. That's why I value your contributions to 1389 Blog, and hope that you will write more in the future.

Islam is NOT a race, NOT a nationality, and NOT an ethnic group. It's a totalitarian ideology, much like Communism or Nazism.

Just for starters, we need to make sure nobody who espouses it is ever in a position to influence policy or to persuade others.

See: Lustration (modern use)

In addition, adherence to Islam is incompatible with allegiance to any non-Muslim country, and should be considered the same as renunciation of citizenship. If that leaves some people stateless, then so be it. They made their bed; let them lie in it until they come to their senses.

Zenster said...

Lots of really useful points here.

1389: Islam is NOT a race, NOT a nationality, and NOT an ethnic group.

Even if it were, none of that changes how:

It's a totalitarian ideology, much like Communism or Nazism.

The damning part of it being that:

adherence to Islam is incompatible with allegiance to any non-Muslim country, and should be considered the same as renunciation of citizenship.

Which, due to the inherently seditious nature of Islam, makes being a Muslim an automatic renunciation of citizenship, save in those countries ― if there are any that even exist ― which do not have anti-sedition laws.

Perhaps most hilarious of all is that even Muslim majority nations could reasonably find Islam seditious due to its doctrine of takfir, whereby there will always be potentially violent dispute in the form of terrorism over whether a government could be more Islamically "pure". And we all know the answer to that question.

Take Pakistan … please.

Hesperado said...

"...even Muslim majority nations could reasonably find Islam seditious due to its doctrine of takfir, whereby there will always be potentially violent dispute in the form of terrorism over whether a government could be more Islamically "pure".

In fact, that's what all the post-Colonial tin-pot Islamic dictatorships did (the ones that fell in the "Arab Spring" or in the "American Eternal Spring" of saving Iraq and Afghanistan) and continue to do (the ones that haven't fallen yet: Saudi Arabia, etc.) -- with a ruthless vengeance, even in "civilized, moderate" Tunisia rounding Muslims up and throwing them in dungeons to be tortured horribly (and many of these fanatically seditious zombies have been released from various prisons in this "Arab Spring" to stagger out in the sunshine looking for their Brotherhood).

One major reason for doing this is because of Muslims seeking to overthrow their Sharia Lite in favor of more Purity -- the driving force of the Islamic Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder. If Satn devised Islam, it was ingenious: to create a mass psychosis where the obsession with purity actually fuels a lust for evil deeds. Everything is reversed in Islam and in the Muslim mind: War is Peace, Peace is War, Law is Disorder, Disorder is Law, Terrorism is Self-Defense, Self-Defense is Terror, Love is Hate, Hate is Love, Paradise is Hell, Hell is Paradise, Truth is Lie, Lie is Truth, Up is Down, Down is Up.

The deadly serious Muslim (as opposed to the mushier, more passive enablers among them), if thus deluded by Satan, is like a jet pilot flying past the speed of sound upside down a few yards from the ground -- and he firmly believes that pulling the steering wheel "Up" will save him -- when in fact he will crash and burn and take everyone around him down with him.