A 21st Century Manifesto For Freedom

Via Michelle Malkin:

MANIFESTO: Together facing the new totalitarianism

After having overcome fascism, Nazism, and Stalinism, the world now faces a new totalitarian global threat: Islamism.

We, writers, journalists, intellectuals, call for resistance to religious totalitarianism and for the promotion of freedom, equal opportunity and secular values for all.

The recent events, which occurred after the publication of drawings of Muhammed in European newspapers, have revealed the necessity of the struggle for these universal values. This struggle will not be won by arms, but in the ideological field. It is not a clash of civilisations nor an antagonism of West and East that we are witnessing, but a global struggle that confronts democrats and theocrats.

Like all totalitarianisms, Islamism is nurtured by fears and frustrations. The hate preachers bet on these feelings in order to form battalions destined to impose a liberticidal and unegalitarian world. But we clearly and firmly state: nothing, not even despair, justifies the choice of obscurantism, totalitarianism and hatred. Islamism is a reactionary ideology which kills equality, freedom and secularism wherever it is present. Its success can only lead to a world of domination: man’s domination of woman, the Islamists’ domination of all the others. To counter this, we must assure universal rights to oppressed or discriminated people.

We reject “cultural relativism”, which consists in accepting that men and women of Muslim culture should be deprived of the right to equality, freedom and secular values in the name of respect for cultures and traditions. We refuse to renounce our critical spirit out of fear of being accused of “Islamophobia”, an unfortunate concept which confuses criticism of Islam as a religion with stigmatisation of its believers.

We plead for the universality of freedom of expression, so that a critical spirit may be exercised on all continents, against all abuses and all dogmas.

We appeal to democrats and free spirits of all countries that our century should be one of Enlightenment, not of obscurantism.

12 signatures

Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Chahla Chafiq
Caroline Fourest
Bernard-Henri Lévy
Irshad Manji
Mehdi Mozaffari
Maryam Namazie
Taslima Nasreen
Salman Rushdie
Antoine Sfeir
Philippe Val
Ibn Warraq

The first intellectual salvo against the newest threat to freedom. . .

Rather than torch property, issue theats of and execute violent acts, and place blame elsewhere, these extremely brave people have issued a warning to nascent Islamo-fascists, that intolerance for others’ beliefs are not acceptable and that excuses, rationalizations, and blackmail will not be tolerated as counter-arguments in order to exploit the liberties allowed by Western democracies. Playing on fear, fomenting violence, and preaching hatred in the name of religious doctrine is simply not compatible with the 21st century global community and the ever-expanding growth of freedom. Intolerance and barbarism, which should have been left behind centuries ago and which resurfaced with such negative force in the 20th century in the form of totalitarianism and ideologically-oriented and state-sanctioned murder–not to mention the innumerable and extremely violent wars exacerbated by the explosion in technology–have once again started to appear. Let us bury them now, or face conflagrations potentially more desctructive and costly.

Also posted at Freedom’s Zone

Stop The ACLU A Manifesto Against Islamism

Holland Leading Europe Into The Twilight of Freedom?

So says Douglas Murray, in the London Times:

Holland — with its disproportionately high Muslim population — is the canary in the mine. Its once open society is closing, and Europe is closing slowly behind it. It looks, from Holland, like the twilight of liberalism — not the “liberalism” that is actually libertarianism, but the liberalism that is freedom. Not least freedom of expression.

All across Europe, debate on Islam is being stopped. Italy’s greatest living writer, Oriana Fallaci, soon comes up for trial in her home country, and in Britain the government seems intent on pushing through laws that would make truths about Islam and the conduct of its followers impossible to voice.

Those of us who write and talk on Islam thus get caught between those on our own side who are increasingly keen to prosecute and increasing numbers of militants threatening murder. In this situation, not only is free speech being shut down, but our nation’s security is being compromised.

Since the assassinations of Fortuyn and, in 2004, the film maker Theo van Gogh, numerous public figures in Holland have received death threats and routine intimidation. The heroic Somali-born Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali and her equally outspoken colleague Geert Wilders live under constant police protection, often forced to sleep on army bases. Even university professors are under protection.

Europe is shuffling into darkness. It is proving incapable of standing up to its enemies, and in an effort to accommodate the peripheral rights of a minority is failing to protect the most basic rights of its own people.

The governments of Europe have been tricked into believing that criticism of a belief is the same thing as criticism of a race. And so it is becoming increasingly difficult and dangerous to criticise a growing and powerful ideology within our midst. It may soon, in addition, be made illegal.

Clash of Civilizations? No, Modernity Vs. Barbarism

Wafa Sultan’s lucid argument in support of free speech, Western Civilization, Western science, and secular modernism destroys attempts by her interviewer to shift the blame from rioting Muslims to a Western scholar (Samuel Huntington and his thesis), and an Imam (who avoids debate by resorting to name-calling), all on MEMRI TV:

Imam: Are you a heretic?

Sultan: You can say whatever you like. I am a secular human being who does not believe in the supernatural…

Imam: If you are a heretic, there is no point in rebuking you, since you have blasphemed against Islam, the Prophet, and the Koran…

Sultan: These are personal matters that do not concern you. Brother, you can believe in stones, as long as you don’t throw them at me.

Sultan, as an Arabic woman of Muslim background (ex-Muslim/atheist) is able to say things that would garner any Western pundit charges of racism, neo-colonialism, and Islamophobia. Perhaps those with first-hand knowledge, like those living under Hitler and Stalin, seeing the depravity, atavism, and lack of respect for human dignity first-hand, can most passionately and persuasively argue in favor of the rational alternative to medieval barbarism.

Also posted at Freedom’s Zone
Michelle Malkin INTERNET JIHAD CONTINUES

Animated Islamic Cartoons From Aljazeera!

Apparently, images of humans and cartoons in general are allowed in Islam, just as long as the target is Israel, Britain, or the USA:

The collection of animated cartoons takes aim (literally) at the West from an Islamist point of view. Another cartoon has a “Christmas” theme, as Santa is passed by Bush in a jet-fighter, about to drop bombs specifically targeted at Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Aljazeera.

Michelle Malkin Still Burning
Expose the Left Matthews Math: Muslim Cartoon Outrage = Bloggers’ Upset Over Port Deal (VIDEO)

Sunday’s Best

For those who might have missed these fine articles from this past week.

Jeff Jacoby:

Like the Nazis in the 1930s and the Soviet communists in the Cold War, the Islamofascists are emboldened by appeasement and submissiveness. Give the rampagers and book-burners a veto over artistic and editorial decisions, and you end up not with heightened sensitivity and cultural respect, but with more rampages and more books burned. You betray ideals that generations of Americans have died to defend.

And worse than that: You betray as well the dissidents and reformers within the Islamic world, the Muslim Sakharovs and Sharanskys and Havels who yearn for the free, tolerant, and democratic culture that we in the West take for granted. What they want to see from America is not appeasement and apologies and a dread of giving offense. They want to see us face down the fanatics, be unintimidated by bullies. They want to know that in the global struggle against Islamist extremism, we won’t let them down.

Mark Steyn:

What, in the end, are all these supposedly unconnected matters from Danish cartoons to the murder of a Dutch filmmaker to gender-segregated swimming sessions in French municipal pools about? Answer: sovereignty. Islam claims universal jurisdiction and always has. The only difference is that they’re now acting upon it. The signature act of the new age was the seizure of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran: Even hostile states generally respect the convention that diplomatic missions are the sovereign territory of their respective countries. Tehran then advanced to claiming jurisdiction over the citizens of sovereign states and killing them — as it did to Salman Rushdie’s translators and publishers. Now in the cartoon jihad and other episodes, the restraints of Islamic law are being extended piecemeal to the advanced world, by intimidation and violence but also by the usual cooing promotion of a spurious multicultural “respect” by Bill Clinton, the United Church of Canada, European foreign ministers, etc.

Tony Blankley:

To see the difference between traditional Anglo-American criminal jurisprudence and his proposed jurisprudence of prevention, he raises the great maxim of criminal law: better that ten guilty go free, than one innocent be wrongly convicted. That principle led our law to require proof beyond a reasonable doubt before conviction in criminal trials. Most of us agree with that standard.

But then Prof. Dershowitz updates the maxim thusly: “Is it better for ten possibly preventable terrorist attacks to occur than for one possibly innocent suspect to be preventively detained?” I would hunch that most people would not be willing to accept ten September 11th attacks (30,000 dead) in order to protect one innocent suspect from being locked up and questioned for a while.

Walter Williams:

During this class session, Mr. Bennish peppered his 10th-grade geography class with other statements like: The U.S. has engaged in “7,000 terrorist attacks against Cuba.” In his discussion of capitalism, he told his students, “Capitalism is at odds with humanity, at odds with caring and compassion and at odds with human rights.”

Regardless of whether you’re pro-Bush or anti-Bush, pro-American or anti-American, I’d like to know whether there’s anyone who believes that the teacher’s remarks were appropriate for any classroom setting, much less a high school geography class. It’s clear the students aren’t being taught geography. They’re getting socialist lies and propaganda. According to one of the parents, on the first day of class, the teacher said Karl Marx’s “Communist Manifesto” was going to be a part of the curriculum.

Sunday’s Best

For those who might have missed these fine articles from this past week.

Jeff Jacoby:

Like the Nazis in the 1930s and the Soviet communists in the Cold War, the Islamofascists are emboldened by appeasement and submissiveness. Give the rampagers and book-burners a veto over artistic and editorial decisions, and you end up not with heightened sensitivity and cultural respect, but with more rampages and more books burned. You betray ideals that generations of Americans have died to defend.

And worse than that: You betray as well the dissidents and reformers within the Islamic world, the Muslim Sakharovs and Sharanskys and Havels who yearn for the free, tolerant, and democratic culture that we in the West take for granted. What they want to see from America is not appeasement and apologies and a dread of giving offense. They want to see us face down the fanatics, be unintimidated by bullies. They want to know that in the global struggle against Islamist extremism, we won’t let them down.

Mark Steyn:

What, in the end, are all these supposedly unconnected matters from Danish cartoons to the murder of a Dutch filmmaker to gender-segregated swimming sessions in French municipal pools about? Answer: sovereignty. Islam claims universal jurisdiction and always has. The only difference is that they’re now acting upon it. The signature act of the new age was the seizure of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran: Even hostile states generally respect the convention that diplomatic missions are the sovereign territory of their respective countries. Tehran then advanced to claiming jurisdiction over the citizens of sovereign states and killing them — as it did to Salman Rushdie’s translators and publishers. Now in the cartoon jihad and other episodes, the restraints of Islamic law are being extended piecemeal to the advanced world, by intimidation and violence but also by the usual cooing promotion of a spurious multicultural “respect” by Bill Clinton, the United Church of Canada, European foreign ministers, etc.

Tony Blankley:

To see the difference between traditional Anglo-American criminal jurisprudence and his proposed jurisprudence of prevention, he raises the great maxim of criminal law: better that ten guilty go free, than one innocent be wrongly convicted. That principle led our law to require proof beyond a reasonable doubt before conviction in criminal trials. Most of us agree with that standard.

But then Prof. Dershowitz updates the maxim thusly: “Is it better for ten possibly preventable terrorist attacks to occur than for one possibly innocent suspect to be preventively detained?” I would hunch that most people would not be willing to accept ten September 11th attacks (30,000 dead) in order to protect one innocent suspect from being locked up and questioned for a while.

Walter Williams:

During this class session, Mr. Bennish peppered his 10th-grade geography class with other statements like: The U.S. has engaged in “7,000 terrorist attacks against Cuba.” In his discussion of capitalism, he told his students, “Capitalism is at odds with humanity, at odds with caring and compassion and at odds with human rights.”

Regardless of whether you’re pro-Bush or anti-Bush, pro-American or anti-American, I’d like to know whether there’s anyone who believes that the teacher’s remarks were appropriate for any classroom setting, much less a high school geography class. It’s clear the students aren’t being taught geography. They’re getting socialist lies and propaganda. According to one of the parents, on the first day of class, the teacher said Karl Marx’s “Communist Manifesto” was going to be a part of the curriculum.

Of Bumper Sticker Ideology, And So Much More

Democrats have a very obvious problem if even the BBC can see they are in trouble:

The Democrats need a message and a new way of communicating that message to a mass audience. They have neither.

And do not be fooled by those who say this malaise is structural, at this stage of the electoral cycle there isn’t a presidential candidate etc.

No, it is more than that. The American left has faded away.

Only their bumper stickers remain, like cockroaches after a nuclear holocaust.

“Re-defeat George Bush,” they whine. Not knowing, not caring that the world has changed.

Stop The ACLU Open Post

Three Month Reprieve for Chief "Shitting Bull" Ward Churchill

“Ward Watch” continues:

BOULDER (AP) – A panel investigating allegations of research misconduct against University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill has delayed a key report for three months.

A five-person investigative committee was to report its findings this week but requested an extension after two members withdrew.

The report is now due May 9th, meaning the school will not decide until June at the earliest whether it will take any action against the tenured ethnic studies professor.

Allard "Most Conservative" In Senate

From the RMN:

Colorado senior Sen. Wayne Allard was doubly pleased today when he was designated “most conservative” in the U.S. Senate and won the Taxpayers’ Friend Award for the ninth year.

The “most conservative” rating came from the “National Journal,” a non-partisan political journal, which tied him with Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn and Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, all Republicans, saying they were 90.8 percent more conservative than the rest of the U.S. Senate.

“Senator Allard was proud of the designation because it pointed to his curbs on fiscal spending and tax measures,” said his spokeswoman, Angela de Rocha.

The same publication rated Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., as being 60.2 percent more liberal than the rest of the senators.

More from the Denver Post. Note that the center-right RMN describes Salazar as “more liberal” and the liberal Denver Post has Salazar as a “centrist.” Semantics are very important.

Kerry Campaigns For Perlmutter In Denver

Kerry bloviates:

“The 7th Congressional District in Colorado is a district of middle-class Americans working hard who need health care, people who need schools that work more efficiently, people that want the environment protected.”

Note to Ed Perlmutter: East-Coast Liberals don’t win national elections–just ask the guy endorsing you–nor does that play well in Colorado. The Salazar brothers won by avoiding explicit ties to the Kerry campaign in ‘04, and remaining outside the image of the posh, elite, Ivy-league liberalism red states despise.