UK Home Affairs Committee: "We remain concerned by the growing support for nonviolent criticism of islam"

Islamofascism protected while Human Rights are betrayed

UK Home Affairs Committee calls the defense of Human Rights the acts of "solitary, disaffected individuals", and instead  wants to silence all criticism (here called "non-violent extremism") against the worst hate crime* ever against humanity throughout 1400 years!


* so e.g. is it beyond doubt a fact that islamic "infidel" ideology has fueled the absolute majority of slavery in the world throughout 1400 nyears. It's also an indisputable fact that Koranic/islamic ideology has created a horrifying one way system of muslim male patriarchy combined with forbidding muslim women from marrying non-muslims etc, all packaged in an apostasy ban (i.e. no right to leave islam) that, no matter what the factual sentences are in a particular time or setting, is considered the worst crime in islam.


The strange word "islamophobia" was created by the help of islamofascists (as the one Saudi "king" dictator below) as one link in a chain of Saudi organized attempts to secure islamofascism from scrutiny through Human Rights (remember, those very core universal rights to freedom that were signed in UN 1948 as a defense against fascism in all forms). See my point? UK Home Affairs Committee is desecrating Human Rights so that Saudi, Qatar etc islamofascists shouldn't be offended.

Klevius comment:  In the 1980's I did a short film about Marlowe's Faustus who sold his soul to the Devil. I'd now like to do a follow-up. However, even if I'd pay for it myself or got it somehow sponsored, the problem reamins: It would never be allowed to be shown! Not now because of a stupefying political correctness, and even less so in near future when whatever that isn't accepted in islamofascist Sharia will be considered the heaviest of crimes! And the comedy in this tragedy is that critics of islam then have to reveal even more about the rotten nature of islam because they have to eliminate every connection to religion, hence leaving the most vulnerable parts (its racism and sexism) of islam open for criticism without naming islam or religion at all. However, if these supporters of islamofascism now choose a censorship similar to that of Goebbels by shutting down web sites and blogs which aren't Sharia compliant, then this will seriously prolong the violence and suffering that islamofascism in all forms now causes.   

UK Home Affairs Committee: "We remain concerned by the growing support for nonviolent extremism (read: criticism of islam)".

But the UK Home Affairs Committee doesn't see any connection ("concrete evidence") between extremist anti-Human
 Rights Sharia and universities supporting it (most often sponsored by islamofascists in Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar etc).  So what's the "concrete evidence" showing that Human Rights could be considered "extremism"?! Could it possibly be the clash between the order given to Cameron on the pic above and Human Rights?!

From Nazifascism to islamofascism

The German Workers Party and Turkey's Justice and Development Party

Freedom of speech (also called "islamophobia") is (and has always been) the worst enemy of fascists

Paul Marshall, Hudson Institute’s Center for Religious Freedom: Islamic anti-blasphemy laws (Sharia) pose a threat to freedom of speech. Many governments deliberately manipulate alleged instances of blasphemy by provoking popular outrage, enabling them to advance “particular policy goals.”


According to Marshall blasphemy codes among muslims are used to stifle religious minorities, as well as muslim reformers who support religious liberty, freedom of speech and democracy.

Mr X "president" a muslim born apostate (?! - either he is a muslim but conceals it, or he's an apostate, meaning he has committed the worst crime known to islam and Sharia, meaning islam is islamofascist!) invites and supports OIC's effort to criminalize criticism and/or "stereotyoing" of islam (the worst racist/sexist hate crime known to human history)

Paul Marshall, Hudson Institute’s Center for Religious Freedom:: America is still threatened by blasphemy laws by OIC (the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation) to promote international laws that ban "insults" (i.e. whatever doesn't comply with Sharia) to islam, through the UN.

According to Marshall there's a growing tendency towards “extra-legal intimidation,” involving private individuals pre-emptively censoring themselves - often under the guise of religious sensitivity - because it is “too dangerous” to "insult" islam.

The effectiveness of this intimidation can be seen in books, newspapers TV shows etc refusing to publish content that could be deemed offensive to sslam, although they chose to carry similar material that mocked Christianity and other religions.


CNA: "Marshall also warned of the potential for government policies that seek to restrict speech. He observed that the Obama administration has vocalized a commitment to fighting “negative stereotypes of Islam,” although it has not done the same for other religions.  Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, he noted, invited the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation to a meeting in Washington, D.C. to discuss how the U.S. could carry out this commitment.  According to Marshall, the December 2011 meeting featured presentations on how  America should fix its treatment of Muslims. It was also suggested that the U.S. should learn from countries in the organization, which use the death penalty to fight blasphemy within their borders, he said.  Although Clinton claimed to be simply pursuing tolerance, Marshall said it was concerning that she was partnering with an organization that has been aggressively lobbying to restrict free speech through legal controls. He urged the Obama administration to end this partnership and instead promote the idea that “in open, boisterous, free societies” all religions will likely be subject to criticism."































.
.