What Ayaan Hirsi Ali said (in her speech to the DPP on 9-18)

On September 18th, Ayaan Hirsi Ali addressed the national meeting of the Danish People's Party, Dansk Folkeparti. The party is something referred to by its Danish initials DF, but more commonly (among English speakers) it is referred to as the DPP.

The video tape of her speech is over an hour long. Ali is first introduced by Party leader Pia Kjærsgaard, and then the beginning of the speech itself is the usual pleasantries, which then gradually transitions into Ali talking in very broad terms about two very different kinds of societies in today's world: (1) on the one hand there are societies in which there are rulers and subjects, and (2) on the other hand there are societies in which there is "liberal democracy, inspired by the Enlightenmnet, where individual citizens are free and equal before the law."

This is starting about 13 minutes into her speech (what is below is only about 7 minutes of the speech, so far):

today we live in a global world, in a global world where in parts of the world where there are rulers and subjects, people are leaving, and they are coming to other parts of the world where people are citizens, and governments are government by the people and for the people. In fact, for the last 30 or 40 years [13:06] we have seen a stream of people from those cultures of subjection. And those subjects, those human beings, are seeking a better life. We see them flock to cultures of democracy.

And, we don't only see the movement [13:30] from one place to another we see two things happen. Those subjects, when they become citizens, appreciate it and celebrate it and love it -- and contribute to the new cultures that they come to. [13:49] But we also see some who do not -- who are confused. Some who find out about citizenship and what it means -- and reject it.

In other words, there is a clash. And that clash is on a local level and it is on a global level. As Danish people you have given us the most famous example of such a clash: the drawings of the cartoons of the prophet mohammed. most muslims were brought up to believe that mohammed, the founder of that religion, was infallible, and they believe that drawing this image is an offense. And when a Danish newspaper published not one image of the prophet mohammed but 12 images, you can imagine the shock and horror that went through that population.

But if you look at things from the perspective of the Danish newspaper and the Danish cartoonists, what do you see? That the prophet mohammed is portrayed as the inspiration for beheading people, for blowing people up, for telling women to stay at home. So they did what i was told Danish people are good at -- they drew cartoons. And this led to a most dramatic confrontation. Perhaps the most dramatic confrontation of the decade.

That confrontation revealed the important differences that i am talking about. The important difference between nations and peoples that are used to being subjects and rulers on the one hand, and nations and peoples that have governments that are chosen by the people, where the people are citizens.

here in denmark there was a danish imam [16:35] who saw those cartoons, 12 of them, [inaudible] he put them in a folder, he took them to the middle east. he took them to places like syria, and egypt and saudi arabia and lebanon. in all of those places, you have that relationship of subjects and rulers. the subjects [17:09] who under normal circumstances are not allowed to dissent, the subjects are not allowed to form political parties, who are not allowed to vote, who are not allowed in their day to day lives, to show what it is in their societies that they don't like about their rulers -- at that instant they were given orders by their rulers to organize and to protest, to burn embassies, to burn the danish flag, and we saw people shouting "death to denmark".

think of places like saudi arabia, where women are not allowed to drive, where women have a guardian, and only with his permission can they leave to go to school, and only when they are chaperoned. women and men are not allowed to mix. but i remember the images clearly -- in the supermarkets where women were now able to tell the difference between yogurt that was from denmark and yogurt that was not. danish yogurt, danish dairy products, were left on the shelves.

this, as we noticed, were demonstrations organized by the state, and the subjects did what they were told to do. the subject in a society like that is like wax. you can mold him or her in any way you like. he's like a zombie. there are dissidents, and opposition takes place, but it takes place in secret. conspiracy theories abound. and if you are found out the punishment is harsh. long years in prison, torture, death.

by contrast, in a liberal democracy the citizen is free. his opinion is formed, based on whatever information he can find out the issue. the institutions of the state [2012] have the object of guaranteeing as much freedom to their citizens as possible. [20:20]

[I'll post more later today!]

A look into America's not too distant future

Coming soon to a "Sharia compliant" society near you!

Six British citizens were arrested by their government today. What was their crime? They burned a copy of the Koran, videotaped it, and then uploaded the videotape to youtube.

I was going to say something like: "hey, no, really -- I'm serious. THIS REALLY HAPPENED!" But you know what? It's not really all that fucking surprising to anyone anymore. Think about that!

Hat tip, once again, to the Islam in Europe blog. Go there to read more, if you have the stomach for it. The story has also been picked up by the Telegraph, the BBC, the Guardian, etc.

[Soviet propaganda posters from davno.ru website, tovaritches!]

Ayodhya: Some historical and political background from Dr. David Frawley

Somnath and Ayodhya: What Is the Difference

By David Frawley

Somnath is one of the most important Hindu sacred sites, relating to Lord Shiva, who is worshipped as the Supreme godhead. Its history goes back to the Vedic era and to the Mahabharat. Its great temple was first destroyed by the Afghani invader, Mahmud of Ghazni, in the eleventh century. It was one of the first great Hindu temples attacked by invading Muslims and its destruction left a great scar on the psyche of Hindus.

Meanwhile Mahmud was hailed throughout the Islamic world as a second Mohammed and his smashing of Somnath was lauded in the Sufi poetry of Attar, Sanai and Omar Khayyam. These poets equated Somnath with the temples to the pagan goddess Al-Manat destroyed by Mohammed and viewed its destruction as the 'will of Allah' and the 'enlightened march of Islam.'

The Hindus rebuilt the temple several times, but the Muslims destroyed it again. The temple was last destroyed by the Mughal tyrant, Aurangzeb around 1700. Aurangzeb, as history records, was a brutal ruler who left a trail of genocide and destruction, mainly aimed at converting Hindus. Aurangzeb built a mosque on the site of the Somnath temple, using some columns from the temple, whose Hindu sculptural motifs remained visible.

Under the guidance of the political leader Sardar Patel and KM Munshi (who founded Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan), the temple was restored around 1950. Mahatma Gandhi also approved of the retaking of Somnath but did not live to see it happen. Recently the President of India, Shanker Dayal Sharma, performed the Kalash pratishthan of the temple's Nritya Mandap and dedicated the temple to the nation.

Hindu leaders, particularly the VHP (Vishva Hindu Parishad), have been asking for the restoration of three great Hindu holy sites whose temples were destroyed and replaced with mosques. These are Ayodhya (Ramajanmabhumi or Ram's birthplace), Mathura (Krishnajanmabhumi or Krishna's birthplace), and the great Shiva temple of Kashi Vishwanath in Varanasi. The restoration of Somnath should be examined to see whether these other proposed restorations are valid.

Both Krishnajanmabhumi in Mathura and Kashi Vishwanath temple are products of similar historical circumstances as Somnath. Both like Somnath were important Hindu holy sites destroyed by Muslim invaders, with the last destruction and building of their present mosques also done by Aurangzeb in the late 17th. Both, like Somnath, retain portions of the original Hindu temples. In fact the whole back wall of the Kashi mosque is from the Kashi Vishwanath temple, complete with all the sculpture.

The case of Ayodhya is not much different. It was destroyed by the first Mughal invader from Central Asia, Babar, in the 16th century and a mosque was built on the site. Like the others, portions of the temple could be found in and around the mosque. Hindus fought repeatedly through the centuries to regain the Ayodhya site but never succeeded in restoring the temple. Such mosques were placed on the holy sites of another religion in order to denigrate it. They are monuments to intolerance, cruelty and self righteousness and should not be looked upon as holy by members of any religion.

One important difference between Somnath and Ayodhya, of course, is that Somnath was reclaimed legally and Ayodhya was destroyed illegally. However the Ayodhya case has been in court since 1947 without a decision so that no legal action can proceed. Moreover, the legal building of Somnath only occurred because of the considerable pressure Indian political leaders put on the Islamic ruler of the area, who had tried to secede to Pakistan though over eighty percent of the population he ruled was Hindu. If Indian leaders today put the same pressure on the Islamic communities that hold these Hindu sacred sites, they will also give them up.

There is some debate today that Ramajanmabhumi or Krishnajanmabhumi cannot be reclaimed because no one can prove that Rama or Krishna, who lived thousands of years ago, were actually born there. Those who restored Somnath were not asked to prove the history of Somnath thousands of years ago before restoring the temple. The tradition itself was enough to warrant the restoration.

Why was Somnath restored and not the others? Because Sardar Patel was a Gujarati (Somnath is in Gujarat) and he unfortunately died in 1950, preventing him from taking similar action for other Hindu sacred sites. Nehru, for whom Patel was the main rival, was not in favor of the restoration of Somnath and he effectively blocked the restoration of the other sites, particularly Ramajanmabhumi.

Nehru ruled as a socialist with communist sympathies, not as a Hindu and his policies followed his ideological bent. In other words, the same process as reclaimed Somnath was initiated in regard to these other sites but was suppressed. Had it I been allowed to go through, the result would probably have been the same. Why is it, therefore, that the restoration of the Somnath temple is a matter of national pride, while attempts to restore the Mathura and Kashi temples are portrayed in the press as the ravings of Hindu militants?

It is hypocritical to separate Somnath from the other three sites. If Kashi and Mathura cannot go back to the Hindus, then the taking of Somnath was illegal. If the destruction of Babri Masjid was a dastardly act, so was the demolition of the Somnath mosque. If Hindu political leaders, like the President, will not go to Ayodhya for worship, they should not go to Somnath either.

On the other hand, if Hindus can reclaim Somnath, they can reclaim the other three sites. In fact of the four sites, it can be argued that the most important is Krishnajanmabhumi, because Krishna is probably the most important Hindu religious figure. Kashi Vishwanath Shiva Temple is also at least as important as Somnath.

Kashi comes first as the city of Shiva. Because Somnath was destroyed first, it gained a greater nostalgia, but not because it is a more important site than the others. The reclaiming of Somnath hence demands the restoration of these other sites.

If Indian political leaders like Sardar Patel could reclaim Somnath and remain good secular leaders that the nation still honors, so can Indian political leaders today. If Somnath can be dedicated to the nation, so can the other sites. If Somnath is a matter of national pride, then certainly Ayodhya and the others deserve to be as well. If a legal process could be created to reclaim Somnath, a similar process can be created to reclaim these other three sites.

Who is asking for the restoration of the Somnath mosque today? No one in India. There is no political action committee for the restoration of the Somnath mosque. If the other sites had been taken back at the same time forty-five years ago, they would no more be political issues today than is Somnath. Similarly if they are taken back today as Somnath was decades ago, they will cease to be issues in a few years. For those opposed to the restoration of Ramajanmabhumi, Kashi and Mathura, let them not forget Somnath.

If Hindus honor Somnath, they should not look down upon attempts to restore Ayodhya, Mathura and Kashi, but, on the contrary, help accomplish this aim.

© 2002 AYODHYA.COM . All Rights Reserved.

Here is an excerpt from short biography of Dr. David Frawley written by Samu Varughese:

David Frawley, otherwise known as Vamadeva Shastri, is a US citizen by birth and a Hindu by conviction. He sees his life work as forming a bridge between these two widely opposing cultures, and he does so with a rare dedication and thoroughness. An acknowledged Vedantin, Frawley is an expert in ayurveda, Vedic astrology, yoga, and tantra , all of which, he says, have their basis in Vedanta. Indeed it is the interdisciplinary approach to Vedanta that he sees as his particular contribution in demystifying eastern spirituality.

Ayodhya verdict deferred for at least one week

The much anticipated verdict in the "Ayodhya case" before the Indian Supreme Court has been deferred. Here is the story according to ANP and AFP (Algemeen Nederlands Persbureau & Agence France-Presse) from the Radio Netherlands Worldwide website:

Indian Supreme Court defers flashpoint court ruling
Published on 23 September 2010 - 11:36am

India's Supreme Court deferred Thursday a high court ruling on a bitter religious dispute that had posed a major security headache ahead of the crisis-hit Commonwealth Games in New Delhi.

The high court in Allahabad in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh had been due to rule Friday on a long-standing ownership struggle over a religious site in Ayodhya, where Hindu zealots destroyed a mosque in 1992.

But the verdict was postponed for at least a week after the Supreme Court said it would hear a private petition requesting more time for mediation.

"The Supreme Court has deferred the Ayodhya verdict. The order states that the high court in Allahabad cannot pass the judgement tomorrow," said an official in the registrar office.

The next hearing on the petition was set for September 28.

"We will try and tell the court the matter should be deferred further and that parties involved in the dispute -- the religious leaders -- should be asked to sit and solve the matter amicably," said Mukul Rohatgi, a lawyer for the petitioner.

"This issue is not about 10 or 100 people. It involves millions of people and there should be representation from all the concerned parties," Rohatgi said.

The razing of the Babri mosque in 1992 triggered some of the worst communal violence since the partition of the Indian sub-continent in 1947.

More than 2,000 people, mostly Muslims, were killed in the rioting.

Since then, the 47-acre (19-hectare) site has been cordoned off with barbed wire and steel fencing and guarded by troops.

Hindus say the mosque had been built by the Moghul emperor Babur on the site of a temple marking the birthplace of the Hindu warrior God Ram.

There had been deep concerns that Friday's scheduled high court ruling could spark widespread unrest, and 200,000 police, paramilitary and other security personnel had been deployed across Uttar Pradesh as a preventative measure.

The petition before the Supreme Court had argued that the Allahabad verdict posed a particular security risk at a time when India's security concerns are focused on the October 3-14 Commonwealth Games being held in New Delhi.

Fears for the safety of athletes and spectators were heightened after a home-grown Islamist group shot at a tourist bus outside New Delhi's main mosque last Sunday, injuring two Taiwanese nationals.

The Supreme Court decision was greeted with dismay by some involved in the Ayodhya dispute who argued that the time for mediation was over.

"It's really unfortunate. People were waiting for the verdict," said S.Q.R. Ilyas, convenor of a committee representing Muslim interests in the dispute.

"All efforts at reaching an amicable solution have been made without result," he said. "The court verdict... is the need of the hour."

The drive to build a Ram temple on the ruins of the razed mosque remains a key political aim of the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which first came to national prominence over the Ayodhya issue.

BJP spokesman Ravi Shankar Prasad, who was appearing as a senior counsel arguing against the petition in the Supreme Court, said he was disappointed.

"I respect the court decision, but I can tell you that there is no possibility of an amicable solution," Prasad said.

Despite appeals for calm from all sides, there are serious concerns about a violent, knee-jerk reaction once the Allahabad High Court eventually delivers its ruling.

"The way the country handles this -- the aftermath -- will have a profound impact on the evolution of our country," Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said earlier in the month.

India has avoided any major outbreak of Hindu-Muslim violence since riots in Gujarat in 2002 and is especially keen to keep a lid on any unrest during the Commonwealth Games.

The Games are already in chaos, with some national delegations threatening to withdraw their teams amid complaints over the "filthy" athletes village and safety concerns after a footbridge leading to one of the main venues collapsed on Tuesday.
© ANP/AFP

For background on Ayodhya please refer to the following links:

• Ayodhya: "Frank debate is inversely proportional to street violence."
• Ayodhya and After by Koenraad Elst
• Is there Hindu fundamentalism? by David Frawley
• Awaken Bharata by David Frawley

"I, too, am from a non-Western country."

Ayaan Hirsi Ali addressed the national gathering of the Danish People's Party on September 18th. In her speech, Ali, who is Somalian, challenged the DPP's position of calling for a complete stop to all immigration from all non-western countries, although she shares the broader goal of halting and reversing the process of Islamization in the West. A complete video of her speech can be found at Vlad Tepes' blog here.

Some on the Left and in the mainstream media have tried to sieze on Ali's remarks, but what they fail to realize is that she is playing a vital role in moving forward the practical and necessary discussion of both the principles and the realpolitik of actually stopping Islamization -- as opposed to the vague generalities and short-sighted oversimplifications that might serve well to get votes and sell books, but which either do not translate into real policies, or, worse, are used to justify regressive, xenophobic policies.

The bottom line is that Islam must be opposed in the name of defending freedom, not in the name of defending the purity of the White Christian West (a fantasy which does not even exist anyway, and wouldn't be worth defending if it did). People who don't like dark-skinned foreigners who don't worship Jebus are just as much of a threat to freedom as are Islamist terrorists and their taqiyya spewing "moderate" accomplices.

Here is how the Copenhagen Post covered Ali's speech:

Hirsi Ali takes on right-wing party
Monday, 20 September 2010 14:32

Danish People’s Party’s annual congress saw prominent Somali rebuking their policies

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a 40-year-old former refugee and a prominent critic of religious extremism, addressed the 15th annual party congress of the Danish People’s Party (DF) on Saturday.

She spoke about the importance of integrating non-Western immigrants in Europe and teaching boys about women's rights and sexual morality in the West from an early age.

After building up the party faithful by suggesting that immigrants should enter into a contract to respect the conditions in Danish society, Ali stoked the fire further by saying in English: ‘I do not understand Danish, but I've heard rumours that your party will stop all immigration from non-western countries?’
After meeting applause again from the crowd, Ali turned on them with the rebuke, ‘I too am from a non-Western country,’ and that ‘it is wrong to say that all non-Westerners can’t be integrated into Denmark’.

The response that time was considerably less enthusiastic, but nevertheless party leader Pia Kjærsgaard remained supportive of Ali. As Kjærsgaard said to her: ‘You are many people’s idol, and you are my idol.’

DF has a tradition of inviting controversial guest speakers. In 2008, it was addressed by Mohammed cartoonist Kurt Westergaard.

Like Westergaard, Ali lives under a constant threat to her life and required a heavy security presence at the meeting. Ali has lived with death threats since composing the screenplay for the 2005 Theo van Gogh film Submission,

In 2005, she was named by Time magazine as one of the 100 most influential people in the world. She now works for the conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute in Washington, DC.

[Hat tip to the Islam In Europe blog.]

In Praise of Teen Witches

The year was 1973. I was a high school student in a small, very conservative factory town in central Indiana.

There were these two girls in our school. People said they were "witches". This wasn't one of the usual, boringly predictable (while at the same time always crude and salacious) rumors that were routinely spread around, seemingly at random. In fact, this rumor was very persistent and very specific -- completely unrandom. And these were the only two people I had ever heard of being literally accused of "witchcraft" in my whole life.

I knew both of them, but only slightly. Certainly not well enough to just haul off and ask, hey, like what is the deal with the rumor that you're, like, "witches"?

But then I started dating a close friend of one of the "witches". So I asked her about her friend: "hey, like, what's the deal with everyone saying she's, like, a witch?"

Now let me emphasize the time and place again. Time: almost 40 years ago. Not even a full 20 years after Gerald Gardner first published Witchcraft Today. And the place? This was the kind of town that gave the world Dan Quayle. The kind of place where someone like Christine O'Donnell floats to the top, instead of the bottom. The kind of place where public school officials exerted significant effort to thwart the attempts of the Supreme Court to enforce the Constitutional separation of Church and State.

OK, now that I've set the stage, here is what my girlfriend told me when I asked why people said that her friend was a witch: "Oh, you shouldn't say that. They don't use that word. They call it the Old Religion -- but they really don't like to talk about it. Basically it's the religion that the Celts had before the Christians came. It's like, well, Paganism, you know? Nature worship. But really, they really don't like to talk about it, and I shouldn't say anything else. Really -- don't ask her about it or tell anyone what I said."

The little hairs on the back of my neck stood up when I heard the phrase "Old Religion". But that was all I could find out from my girlfriend. I did try to find out more about "the Celts" in the local library -- but none of the books I found said anything about what kind of religion anyone had "before the Christians came."

It would be another 15 years before I happened upon Starhawk's book The Spiral Dance in a B Dalton's bookstore at a mall in Indianapolis (by then I had moved to The Big City). Aha! I thought, this is what she was talking about!

No giggling about "Satanic altars". No dabbling. Just some young people practicing the Old Religion -- and who didn't want anything from anyone else except to be left alone to worship nature in peace. I am getting sick of all the pointless babble about Christine O'Donnell. So I just wanted to tell this little true story about two brave (and very real) teen witches who made a real difference in my life. They let me know that the Old Religion was still alive. And that is some very powerful magic.

"What can the American Muslim community do to protect Molly Norris?" Apparently, nothing.

UPDATED! There is an important update to this post at the bottom.

Sheila Musaji is the founding editor of The American Muslim, a website "dedicated to the promotion of peace, justice, and reconciliation for all humanity." Yesterday she posted a long article titled, "What can the American Muslim community do to protect Molly Norris?" (It's over 3,000 words, and if it were printed out in a 12 point font it would be seven pages long.)

Much of the article consists of Musaji belittling and mocking Ms. Norris, and generally saying that she brought this on herself and that Muslims ("real" Mulims, that is) bear no responsibility whatsoever for her predicament.

My favorite part is when Musaji actually says of Norris:

How she could have been unaware that such a proposal could bring out the extremist element on both sides who would use the event to pursue their own agendas (having nothing to do with free speech) is difficult to understand.

What an incredibly revealing declaration. Musaji comes right out and admits -- no, she in essence proudly asserts -- that Muslims can be counted on to react with bloodthirsty savagery to cartoons! And anyone who doesn't understand that this is just how Muslims roll, well, they'll find out soon enough.

But the title of Musaji's long-winded diatribe said something about protecting Molly Norris, not ridiculing her, didn't it? Hmmm. Well, if we read through the first 2,350 words or so, we finally get to this:

If it was in my power to personally protect Ms. Norris, I would do so. If it was in my power to find and arrest Al-Awlaki, or any other person instigating or attempting to carry out violence against another, I would do so. I wish that I knew what more I could do other than condemn such words and actions.

But I thought that "moderate" Muslims like Musaji were fighting tooth and nail to defeat the extremists!? But according to Musaji they have already given up -- and it really isn't their problem anyway.

Anyone who wants to know how "moderate" Muslims really think should seriously study Sheila Musaji's very enlightening article.

UPDATE: I just noticed that Sheila Musaji maintains a very long list of "Actions" that people can take so that they can "make a difference." There are well over 200 separate "Actions" that people are called on to participate in, mostly consisting of signing petitions, writing letters and "urging" various politicians to do various things. Some of the noble causes highlighted there include the "Leave No Gaza Student Left Behind" petition, five separate action items condemning Israel over the Mavi Marmara incident, a petition "to demand that Republican leaders stop turning a blind eye to violence and hate before it gets out of control and someone gets hurt," and so forth. Nowhere is Molly Norris' case mentioned in any of these ways for people to "make a difference"!

[The cartoon was found at the skeptically.org website here.]

What Does the Muslim Brotherhood think of the new Pew report?

The Muslim Brotherhood has its own official English language website. Who knew? I only discovered this because I had taken notice of the dearth of media coverage on the newly released Pew report on "Muslim networks" in Western Europe (see my previous post on the report for a brief overview and links to Pew's website where you can read more and even download the full report).

It was while searching through what very little media coverage there is on the Pew report that I came across an article titled "New Pew Forum Report offers an In-Depth Profile of Muslim Networks and Movements in Western Europe," at a website called IkhanWeb. At first I did not notice that IkhanWeb is "The Muslim Brotherhood official English web site."

Overall it appears that the Muslim Brotherhood is quite pleased with the new report, in which they are featured prominently. Pew, it should be emphasized, is hardly a bunch of liberal kumbayaist Obama-boosting Islamophilic Ground Zero Mosque supporters. In fact, the director of their "Forum on Religion and Public Life", under whose aegis the report was done, is a conservative Christian named Luis Lugo whose last job prior to coming to Pew was at the Center for Public Justice, a group committed to government subsidies for Christian missionary work (via "faith based initiatives"), and combatting the evils of non-procreative sex. (Officially, of course, all the folks at Pew are as objective as the driven snow. For more on Pew and Lugo, look here).

But now, let's allow the Muslim Brotherhood speak for themselves:

New Pew Forum Report offers an In-Depth Profile of Muslim Networks and Movements in Western Europe
The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life has released a new report on "Muslim Networks and Movements in Western Europe," profiling several of the oldest, largest and most influential Muslim groups

The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life has released a new report on "Muslim Networks and Movements in Western Europe," profiling several of the oldest, largest and most influential Muslim groups operating in Western Europe today. A close look is taken at the distinct histories, missions and executive frameworks of these groups including the Gulen Movement; the Muslim Brotherhood and Jama'at-i Islami; the Muslim World League and World Assembly of Muslim Youth; Jihadi Networks and Hizb ut-Tahrir; Sufi Orders; and Tablighi Jama'at.

Focusing on transitional networks and movements whose origins lie in the Muslim world but currently have a significant existence the report discusses the influence on daily lives of Muslims living there;

“Many of the younger leaders are pressing for an agenda that focuses on the interests and needs of Muslims in particular European countries rather than on global Islamic causes, such as the Israeli-Palestinian dispute”.

It highlighted that several Islamic groups with foreign roots had changed their focus to European issues because of pressure from younger European-born Muslims with fewer links to the Muslim majority countries their families emigrated from.

The report examines how European governments cooperate with the groups and the growing connections between Islamic groups and European governments, and the integration of some of these groups into the continent's political mainstream concluding that;

“These Muslim groups and movements have become more visible on the European political stage and have not led to a decrease in activism on the part of these groups”.

Other examinations include the possible future challenges these networks face considering shifts in leadership and membership ranks. According to the report;

“Many Muslims in Western Europe participate in the activities of these movements and networks, and the groups' formal membership rolls appear to be relatively small”.

It continues however that;

“Despite the low levels of formal membership, these groups often exert significant influence by setting agendas and shaping debates within Muslim communities in Western Europe. The growing connections between Islamic groups and European governments, as well as the integration of some of these groups into the continent's political mainstream, have not led to a decrease in activism on the part of these groups. If anything, Muslim groups and movements have become more visible on the European political stage."

The report also indicates there is a significant presence in Western Europe and North America.

The report sums up that in short it is difficult to generalize about Muslim groups in Western Europe because they vary so widely in their philosophies and purposes.

Blasphemous Images

There are a variety of Christian groups and individuals in the West that are as hell-bent as ever on censoring anything that "offends" them, and punishing those responsible.

For example, here is an outraged call to action for protests against "Chocolate Jesus", a piece by Canadian artist Cosimo Cavallaro. Another example is the now infamous "Merry Titmas" exhibit by "notorious art curator" Lenora Claire in 2007.

Below are some not quite randomly selected images that could, potentially, be seen as examples of anti-Christian blasphemy. (Including one from Claire's "Merry Titmas" show):

The cover of a relatively recent book on Republicanism and Anticlerical Nationalism in Spain, by Enrique Sanabria:



Some naughty nuns by Clovis Trouille:


.
.

















Max Ernst's "Virigin Spanking the Christ Child":



Jesus Guinness & Jesus Thong:




The Virgin Mary depicted as a Hooter's waitress:



"Motivational Poster" styled blasphemy:





Racing Nuns action figures:



Sexy Jesus t-shirts from zazzle:



Sexy Nun stickers from zazzle:



Lookin' Good for Jesus products by Blue Q:



Objectified Jebus:



Jesus Elvis:



Jesus Christ On A Bicycle:




even more blasphemy at
e g r e g o r e s:

• Possibly blasphemous images of the Virgin Mary
• Blasphemy
• Blasphemy, Part Deux
• The right to oppose Islam
• A plague on both their houses
• Melanie Phillips on Lars Hedegaard
  
• "Republicanism, Irreligion, Heresy, Paganism, and Sodomy."
• Blasphemy case against Nergal dismissed
• More on Nergal's case
  
• Doda: "Forbidden fruit tastes better."
• Two more "hate speech" cases
• Sex, Religion, Art, Music & Freedom of Expression in Poland
• Holocaust Denial is OK, but criticizing Islam is not. Apparently
• Early March, 2010 Blasphemy World Roundup!!
• The kids are alright (in praise of Blasphemous Metal)