Så fandt jeg Tom Hollands forsøg på at finde islams historiske rødder, der har indbragt ham så mange trusler. Var det det arabiske imperium, der var ophav til islam og ikke omvendt? Hvorfor nævnes Muhammed ikke én gang i næsten 100 år efter, at han skulle have levet, og efter de første ‘muslimers’ erobringer af blandt andet Jerusalem? Nogenlunde det samme spørgsmål Robert Spencer stiller i sin seneste bog Did Muhammed Exist? Historievidenskaben og den politiske religion er på kollisionskurs her – igen. Det kan ikke være kommet helt bag på Tom Holland, hvis familie nu skal kigge sig over skulderen i London. – Seneste fra England om historikeren Tom Holland: Channel 4 cancels Tom Holland’s Islam documentary after threats, Channel 4 cancels Islam documentary screening after death threats
I USA er en lidt anderledes filmmager gået i flyverskjul: Sam Bacile udtaler over telefonen fra et ukendt sted: “Islam is a cancer and I want his film to make a political statement.” Det forlyder hans film er et diletantisk makværk, men det ser ummahen nok stort på.
Bruce Bawer: The Jagland Report, Designed To Transform Europe
Want to see just how far our lords and masters are willing to go in appeasing Islam? Take a gander at a recent report entitled Guidelines for Educators on Countering Intolerance and Discrimination against Muslims: Addressing Islamophobia through Education. A joint product of the Council of Europe, UNESCO, and something called the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (otherwise known as OSCE/ODIHR), this document was put together in consultation with “education experts, teachers, civil society representatives and governmental officials” around the world.
I will call it, for short, the Jagland Report, after Thorbjørn Jagland, the ambitious Norwegian politician who, as head of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, was chiefly responsible for awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to Obama, and who, in his current capacity as Secretary-General of the Council of Europe, is one of the report’s three signatories. Given that he is a classic example of the slick, phony European technocrat par excellence – like Dominique Villepin in France and Zapatero in Spain – it is perfectly appropriate to affix his name to this slick, phony masterwork of bureaucrat-speak.
The entire report is written in this kind of prose. Indeed the whole thing reads as if it were designed to be the quintessential example of everything George Orwell complained about in his landmark essay “Politics and the English Language.” As Orwell pointed out, prose like this, consisting of long series of abstractions strung together in familiar ways, is generally perpetrated by people (or committees) who are setting forth a “party line”: “Orthodoxy, of whatever color, seems to demand a lifeless, imitative style.” The problem with such prose, as Orwell stressed, is not just its lifelessness, however, but the insidious purpose that usually underlies this lifelessness – namely, a determination to avoid facing up to ugly realities. (“The great enemy of clear language,” Orwell noted, “is insincerity.”)
Reading through this mind-bogglingly Orwellian document, one finds oneself wondering continually: How can these people bring themselves to put their names to this disgraceful document? Do they fully understand where they’re taking us with this sort of thing? Do they not grasp that what they’ve produced here is a set of directives that has nothing whatsoever to do with combating intolerance but everything to do with adapting schools in the non-Muslim world to sharia norms? Indeed, virtually all of the examples of supposed intolerance that the report offers up are not examples of intolerance but, rather, of a failure on the part of non-Muslims to shift quickly enough into submissive mode when Muslims come a-complaining. The basic message of this “report” is that when it comes to Islam, the last thing non-Muslim educators should do is to educate – instead, they should replace the grim facts about Islam with pretty lies, and condemn truth-telling as Islamophobia while training students to be craven dhimmis.In short, a mischievous, mendacious piece of work – yet another thing for the reprehensible Thorbjørn Jagland to be ashamed of, were he capable of shame. World Community Takes On ‘Islamophobia’