American Thinker Reader’s Anti-Jihad Policy Suggestions for SION

On 9/16/12 American Thinker ran the article “A Plan to Stop the Islamization of the World is at Hand.”  This article heartily praised the organization Stop the Islamization of the World (SION) as the world’s leading anti-Jihad organization.  And it lauded the inaugural meeting of SION’s International Freedom of Speech Congress (IFSC) held on 9/11/12. 

However, it was argued that the IFSC would have more impact if their meetings supplemented the focus on speeches with policy formation. As such, my American Thinker article proposed 11 policy planks that the IFSC could consider.  After 175 comments many were revised, deleted and added. Here are the 21 policy ideas that we, the American Thinker community, think the IFSC should consider adopting as policy. 

We believe the IFSC should:

1)   Stand for the immediate halt of immigration by Muslims into western nations.

2) Denounce the violation of any rights or the harassment of any peaceful Muslim citizens in the West.

3) Reclassify Islam from a religion to a political organization for the purposes of law.

4)   Call for an investigation into the CAIR and other Islamic advocacy groups under the Foreign Agent Registration Act.

5)  Undertake regular inventories of mosques in the West to look for pro-violence materials. Furthermore, we support surveillance of mosques where more than 5 % of the materials advocate violence.

6)  Close down any mosque which advocates Jihad.

7) Call for the immediate investigation into foreign mosque funding in the West. And, proposes to make foreign funding of mosques in non-Islamic nations illegal.

8) Oppose the use as spiritual mentors in prisons by any person associated with either mosques that advocate violence or terror affiliated organizations.

9) Initiate deportation hearings against non-citizens who promote Jihad in our nations.

10) Make clear that we oppose the cultural blindness of multiculturalism and are not racist, the IFDC promotes the words “culturism” (the opposite of multiculturalism) and “culturist.” Recognizing the importance of diversity, announce that we are a culturist movement, not a racist one.

11) Support culturist profiling at airports and in hiring practices when national security and public safety could be compromised.

12) Require curriculum to describe the violent tactics of Muhammad and the 1,400-year conflict between Islam and non-Islamic nations and peoples.  This curriculum should also be used in museums and memorials which touch upon the topic of Islam.

13) Make the foreign funding of Islamic Studies departments and faculty positions in our universities illegal.

14) Advocate that we not accept students from Islam dominated countries to enter into any fields of study which would endanger national security or be used to military purposes.

15) Adopt the policy of disproportionate response whenever our property or citizens are harmed. 

16) Support a culturist foreign policy wherein we make decisions that take cultural affiliation into account.  We must side against Muslims who are ethnically cleansing Christians.

17) Call for a halt of foreign aid to Islamic nations.

18) Demand the revoking of UN resolution 16/18 and any other resolutions that might limit the freedom of speech.

19) Either lobby to have the UN to declare all Jihad a crime against humanity or totally withdraw from the UN and ask it to relocate to another nation.

20) Recommend that nations pursue a policy of energy independence with the aim of defunding Islamic expansion.

21) Prohibit the use of Sharia-based law or practices in any western court, nation, or any government functions in said nations.

The preceding suggestions do not represent the official policy of SION or the IFSC.  Neither do each of these policies represent the views of the forum moderator, John K. Press. We recognize that the leadership of IFSC will formulate policy on behalf of the IFSC.  And, if the IFSC formulates policies, we rank-and-file Jihad activists will ultimately enthusiastically support the final policy platform.  We hope that they do.

Dr. Press is the author of the book Culturism: A Word, A Value, Our Future.  He is also the inspiration behind the British political movement the National Culturists.

Reflections of the SION International Freedom Defense Congress

On September 11th, 2012, Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer hosted the Stop the Islamization of Nations (SION) International Freedom Defense Congress (IFDC). For this they deserve praise and thanks. I offer the following idea as a constructive suggestion.

A congress is a deliberative body. Rather than deliberation, we heard wonderful and inspiring speeches from activists, artists, and researchers working on the problem of the growing influence of Islam. True to the name, I would have liked to have had a portion of the event dedicated to debating and crafting an IFDC platform.

Among suggested policy planks, the following might have emerged:

1) The IFDC stands for the immediate halt of immigration by Muslims into western nations.

2) To make clear that we oppose the cultural blindness of multiculturalism and are not racist, the IFDC promotes the words “culturism” (the opposite of multiculturalism) and “culturists.” Recognizing the importance of diversity, we are a culturist movement, not a racist one.

3) The IFDC promotes regular inventories of mosques in the West to look for pro-violence materials. Furthermore, we support surveillance of mosques where more than 5 % of the materials advocate violence.

4) The IFDC supports culturist profiling at airports and in hiring practices when national security and public safety could be compromised.

5) The IFDC advocates deportation hearings against non-citizens in our nations that promote Jihad.

6) The IFDC calls for the immediate investigation into foreign mosque funding in the West. And, the IFDC propose to make foreign funding of mosques in the West illegal.

7) The IFDC denounces all violence.

8) The IFDC denounces the violation of any rights  or the harrassment of any peaceful Muslim citizens in the West.

9) The IFDC calls for curriculum and Islam related memorials and museums to describe the violent tactics of Muhammad and the 1400 year conflict between Islam and non-Islamic nations and peoples.

10) The IFDC denounces the use of western dollars and lives to attempt to turn Islamic nations into Western nations. And the IFDC denounces sending western foreign to Islamic nations generally.

11) The IFDC denounces the use of Sharia-based law in any western court or nation.

To be sure, these platform planks would have engendered difficult debates. Some would have been removed.  Some would have been added.  The order would have garnered discussion. We would have to work tirelessly to agree upon wording. But that is what congresses do.

This released final IFDC platform would have reduced the media’s ability to spin the reporting against us. It would provide a platform for western political parties to either adopt or refute. And, it would provide a litmus test for western politicians.

John K. Press, Ph.D.

www.culturism.us

Why is Culturist John Such a Jerk??

          Pamela Geller asked that people bring flags rather than political signs to her 9 - 11 protest against the Ground Zero mosque.  In fact, she originally said she'd confiscate anything other than flags.  Furthermore, she said terrible things about the August 22nd Anti-Mosque rally at Ground Zero.  And, I want to bring a sign that says, "Stopping Sharia in America is Culturist not Racist."  

       I respect Pamela.  She is a relentless anti-Jihadist and I have seen her at a million rallies.  But at none of those events were we in the audience told what to say.  I have a gut reaction against all who would stifle the voice of the public.  But respecting Pamela, I assume there must be some good served by not letting the people vent their spleen as they see fit.

       If I get it, Pamela argues that it is more sensitive to 9 - 11 families to bring flags.  I think crowds battling the enemy head-on with signs that say "No Sharia Here" will do more to lift 9 - 11 families' feelings than indulging in vague patriotic platitudes.  To me, identifying the enemy and saying "never again" respects the victims.  I know at least some 9 - 11 families feel the same way.

       So when Pamela's people ask me to put away my sign, should I?  Is there something I am missing?  Am I being a jerk?  I think this rally should represent the same defiance of Sharia than all the others.  Perhaps that defiance will come from the speakers.  Perhaps there is strategic point I am missing.  I plan on bringing my sign.  Should I?  Would my bringing a sign prove that I am a big jerk?

Ron Paul, Pamela Geller, and Culturism at CPAC

At CPAC three positions on Islam were apparent. One was represented by Pamela Geller’s “Freedom Defense Initiative” conference. The second came from the Ron Paul followers. And the third appeared in the conference’s otherwise deafening silence on Islam. Culturism has a lot to say about all three positions.

Ron Paul’s followers believe that Islamic terrorist attacks result from our overbearing presence in the Middle East. Therefore, they recommend pulling our troops out of that region. As a culturist, I agree that we should not be nation building in Iraq and Afghanistan. As a culturist I believe the project of turning these nations into progressive democracies with respect for individual rights will fail because their cultures will not support such changes. And I agree with Ron Paul’s argument for disengagement based on our inability to afford these nation-building enterprises. Western culturists know that if the West is not solvent our values will die globally.

But none of Paul’s followers could explain why the Jihad in Thailand and India exist. Neither nation has military bases outside of their own borders. As multiculturalists do, the followers of Paul fail to appreciate that diversity is real and important. Diversity is not just about food, festivals, and fashion. Some cultures drop out of school early and think teen pregnancy is not so bad. Other cultures think our way of life is a blasphemous affront to God. Diversity is real and important. Overlooking the cultural aspects of Jihad will not safeguard us.

Geller’s event explained domestic Jihad initiatives. Whereas Paul could not believe that an aggressive Islam for Islam’s sake exists, Geller’s speakers clearly showed that it can and does exist. As a culturist, I agreed with their domestic solution. We need culturist profiling at airports. We need to limit Islamic immigration. That is not, by the way, racist - it is culturist. And, we need to recognize that western cultural practices and laws are the norm and standard in western nations. We should not recognize Sharia courts or allow, for example, veils in photo Identification. Unlike multiculturalists, culturists recognize that the West has a culture to protect and promote. Domestically Geller’s group was very culturist.

Culturism and Geller diverge on foreign policy. Culturism believes in national cultural sovereignty. Allen West said we should seek to defeat Islam, not Muslims. I am unclear how the two are to be separated. Quoting Ronald Reagan, he said victory means “we win, they lose.” That statement holds too little nuance for me. We all agree on bombing Iran’s nuclear sites and being aggressive in regions of Afghanistan that harbor terrorist. But culturists do not believe we will convert Islamic nations by the sword. If we want the sovereignty to pursue culturist policies domestically, we must also grant that right to other nations. We are not the world. We are the West. The idea that we will convert Islam nations by the sword is, as Ron Paul says, a dangerous proposition we cannot afford.

At CPAC the third position on Islam, and the largest, was overwhelming silence. Outside of Ron Paul’s “Why real conservatives don’t support the war on terror” meeting and Geller’s event, few deemed Islam worth discussing. Ron Paul at least wants to debate our presence in Iraq and Afghanistan. And Geller schooled the conference on domestic threats. We conservatives, as Americans and as Westerners, need to accept culturist position that our culture is not that of the world. Diversity exists internationally. Furthermore, we must shake off the multicultural position that the West has no core culture to protect. Geller and Paul have done us a great service in making conservatives think about the West’s relationship to Islam.

Muslims Believe in Islam

Today I attended a counter protest to a nakbah rally near the U.N. building in New York. Nakbah means “Palestinian Catastrophe” and refers to the creation of Israel. Apparently, other Muslim nations also considered the creation of Israel a disaster. All of Israel’s Muslim neighbors attacked Israel on its birthday. They lost. Israel exists. But I did not attend the counter demonstration because I think it obvious that Israel is right and the Palestinians are wrong. Culturism accepts the possibility that the Palestinians believe they are right. Muslims believe the Koran represents perfect morality.

Though we cannot say who is right, we do have a dog in this fight. With small lulls, the West has been fighting Muslims for 1400 years. The Muslims religion started in 622 ad and quickly took over the Middle East, North Africa and attempted to take Europe. The Crusades were aimed at allowing Christians to visit areas the Muslims had conquered. September 11, 2001 echoed the battle of Vienna on September 11th, 1683. In that battle the Europeans halted Muslim expansion into Europe via the East. This mirrored the Western front where the Muslims held Spain from 711 until 1492.

Upon reaching the rally I met up with the beautiful and inspiring Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs. She does not know it, but we disagree philosophically. She considers Islam savage and backwards. In her reporting she considered it ironic that women would parade for Islam. Culturists acknowledge that Muslims believe Islam is right; they are willing to die for their side because they believe in it. We, of course, believe in our side, but no international judge or destiny can prove who is right. If our truths were obvious, they would have been converted a long time ago. Muslims believe in their values as firmly as we believe in ours.

If culturism had a weakness it would occur in cases of genocide and hatred. One Jewish man at the rally was greeted with chants of “Jew! Jew! Jew! I hope you die today!” We who study know of the concept of “dhimmitude” whereby Jews and other non-believers receive humiliating second class citizenship under Islamic rule. In response, first of all, culturism respects majority culture’s rights. That means Muslim states have no right to attack other states such as Israel. Secondly, where such dhimmitude gets implemented, the majority consider it right. They can enforce it via power. Culturism is very realistic. Morality only exists in practice where it can be enforced.

Strategically we are better off understanding those who believe in Islam hold fundamentally different values, are willing to die and kill for them, and will show no mercy once in power. The United Nations will not rescue the West. Their pretended stance of moral neutrality does not exist. The nations there in have a point of view that has nothing to do with impartial declarations of justice. Many in the U.N. sympathize with terrorists and would cheer the day any Western nation, including Israel, fell. When we put our faith in “international,” and “humanitarian” ideals we deceive ourselves. Peace and security can only come about when we realize we are different and respect each others right to define and protect our respective ways of life. We should not assume fundamental agreement. Those in the United Nations take sides and we must too.

Culturism hates multiculturalist belief that we all share fundamental values and are all on the same side. Multiculturalist thinking allowed the Muslims to bring school children in from public school Madrassas to scream hatred towards Western nations and Jews. Multiculturalism fails to realize that Islamic values are diametrically opposed to Western values. They do not agree with Western notions of democracy, feminism, freedom of speech and separation of church and state. U.N. votes show this to be true. Terrorism in Europe over cartoons confirms our differences. Marches against Israel’s existence confirm we have diametrically opposed agendas. The United States and other Western nations need to realize there are irreconcilable sides and Muslims believe theirs is right.