An investigation into Wikipedia's claim that Islamic supremacism is an illusion.
President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is in New York. According to the regime's official FARS News Agency, he is "set to meet American university students, artists, intellectuals and elites, including Occupy Wall Street anti-capitalist protestors, despite the ongoing efforts made by the pro-Zionist lobbies to prevent direct link between American people and the Iranian president."
The irony of this announcement must be lost on all of the above, including the Occupy Wall Street anti-capitalist fighters against all things supremacist: they are about to offer a propagandistic platform to a leading figure of Islamic supremacism, whose "news" agency can't even file a short report without an anti-Semitic jab.
Wikipedia defines supremacism as "the belief that a particular race, species, ethnic group, religion, gender, sexual orientation, class, belief system or culture is superior to others and entitles those who identify with it to dominate, control or rule those who do not."
Whoa! Wait one oppression-fighting minute! Species? Sexual orientation? Is there an article in Wikipedia where the sneaky "progressives" haven't laid their silly post-modernist eggs? But let's play "which word doesn't belong" some other time. A more pressing issue here is that the above definition perfectly describes Islam, states its goals and motivations, and explains the origins and purpose of the segregationist Sharia legal system that purports to be superior to individual equality and liberty.
Counter-terror experts describe Islamic supremacism as an activist, transnational ideology that seeks the transformation or assimilation of every human being, with the ultimate goal to establish a global Islamic caliphate to govern Earth. Islamic supremacism may provide the ideological basis for Jihadist terrorism, but its adherents seek to attack and undermine equality and liberty using many other tactics.
Not only is Islam today's most potent, long-lasting, and threatening form of supremacism - it is also the one that is being willfully overlooked by its potential victims, who are all too busy welcoming it in New York: the aforementioned "American university students, artists, intellectuals and elites, including Occupy Wall Street anti-capitalist protestors." Might I add that deemed inferior are also those who plant words like "species" and "sexual orientation" into the Wikipedia definition of supremacism.
The latter themselves represent a loosely organized "religion of peace," united by their faith that word manipulation can somehow alter reality. They may even feel superior to others due to their skills in "framing the debate." And yet, despite their ritualistic lying to themselves and others, there is no such thing as "moderate supremacism" or "the supremacism of peace."
An example of their intellectual and moral contortionism is found in the same Wikipedia article, which laughably claims that Islamic supremacism is an illusion caused by "misinterpreting" Islam's history of invasions, massacres, oppression, and slave trade.
Some academics and writers have alleged Muslim or Islamic supremacism. The Qur'an and other Islamic documents always speak of tolerant and protective beliefs which have been misused, misquoted and misinterpreted by supremacists and anti-Islamic elements. Specific examples of how supremacists have exploited the name of Islam includes Muslim participation in the African slave trade, the early 20th century pan-Islamism promoted by Abdul Hamid II, the jizya and rules of marriage in Muslim countries being imposed on non-Muslims, the majority Muslim interpretations of the rules of pluralism in Malaysia, and "defensive" supremacism practised [sic] by some Muslim immigrants in Europe.
Well, of course! And the allegations of Nazi supremacism must also be the invention of anti-Aryan elements. Specific examples of how the Aryan-phobes have exploited the good name of the Nazi movement include the annexation of Austria and territories in Eastern Europe; the occupation of Poland, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, the Netherlands, and France; the militaristic rule over the rest of Europe; the bombings of Britain and the invasion into the USSR, not to mention their vast network of concentration camps. Especially misused, misquoted and misinterpreted is the atypical event to which some academics and writers refer as "the Holocaust," perpetrated by a fringe group of extremist lunatics without the approval of the vast majority of moderate Nazis. Come to think of it, the entire WWII was merely an act of "defensive" supremacism to remedy the insults inflicted on the Aryan master race by inferior people. What a shame.
How loud must one scream into a deaf ear? What else needs to be said to convey the idea that of all the aforementioned forms of supremacism, real or imaginary, Islam is the only one that is currently growing in strength, numbers, and influence? That the current upheaval in the Muslim world has nothing to do with the silly "film" (which they haven't seen), and everything to do with the impulse to "dominate, control, and rule"? Would using "progressive" phraseology help?
"This is what democracy looks like" was often heard at Occupy Wall Street rallies from hatchlings of the "progressive" eggs we have seen deposited sneakily on the Internet, in textbooks, films, and news coverage. Their leaders also tried to garner the support of Islamists by embracing their alleged grievances, but having showed up only once for a public prayer and witnessing the ungodly Occupy lifestyle, Muslim groups quickly decided they weren't THAT tolerant. Predictably, this was promptly squirreled away by the Occupiers into the lessons-not-learned tent.
Call me a hopeless idealist who can't seem to learn his lessons either, but I'll try to make a point one more time, with this series of images titled "This Is What Islamic Supremacism Looks Like." Hey, what are the odds they'll end up illustrating the article on supremacism in Wikipedia?
Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.