How can an association of "racism" ever be made in the criticism of doctrine? what purpose could such an association serve? what logic could justify an association of doctrine with race? and why would any such association involve "Palestine"?
In 2009 on the opening night of my exhibition Humanist Transhumanist, in which I critiqued religion, I was described as "racist" by Robert Cripps, pictured, because I included in my critique of religion, criticism of Islam. Other religions critiqued, Christianity, Judaism and Zoroastrianism, though, were not deemed "racist" by Cripps.
If quotes from the Koran (c. 650 AD) or the hadith (c. 850 AD) can be suppressed, then those who, because they are racist and hate Jews, can claim to have a justified hatred of the object of their hatred, Jews, vis-a-vis the "Palestine" issue ….an issue which came about after the creation of Israel (in 1948 AD), even though the doctrinal urgings followed by Muslims with regards to the "Palestine question" predate Israel by well over a millennium. That is, such people are racist, and can only blame Jews if they can suppress open discussion of Islamic doctrine.
Islamic doctrine calls for the genocide of the Jews (as per hadith dating to c. 850 AD). "Palestinians" pursue perpetual war against Jews and do so as a religious duty, a duty that is openly proclaimed, by, for example, Hamas. The Hamas Covenant of 1988 AD is based on, and consistent with, the Koran and the hadith. Hamas unequivocally states:
"Article Eight:Allah is its target, the Prophet is its model, the Koran its constitution: Jihad is its path and death for the sake of Allah is the loftiest of its wishes.The Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine is an Individual Duty:Article Fifteen:It is necessary to instill in the minds of the Moslem generations that the Palestinian problem is a religious problem , and should be dealt with on this basis."
There is no ambiguity. This is a war demanded by Islamic doctrine as a Muslim's religious duty. Israel has nothing to do with it, other than its existence causes Islam affront. However, Jews can successfully be blamed for a religious war waged against them by making taboo any and all references to the Koran and the hadith. Suppression of knowledge of Islamic doctrine is successfully accomplished by calling "racist" those who might make available to others knowledge of the contents of the Koran, or the hadith.
PRO-PALESTINAINS, the case against Yasemin Shamsili; how to make false accusations.
An effort supported and sanctioned by the different apparatus of the state in Australia (which includes the universities and courts) intend to limit criticism of Islam to allow for blame regarding "Palestine" to be apportioned to Jews.
Yasemin Shamsili, above, blames the violence of her own supporters on those against whom the violence was done.
Yasemin Shamsili, (whose name appears as Yasmin Shamsil in theTV footage, in the still above) is an exemplar of the kind of person who would prefer that knowledge of Islam, the Koran, and the hadith be suppressed so that she can hold onto her hatred of Jews; that is, Islam calls for the genocide of Jews and "Palestinians" are acting toward achieving this end; and people like Shamsili support the "Palestinians" and their cause; Shamsili is therefore a racist and a liar: she holds on to her racism by attempting to restrict criticism of Islam by calling criticism of Islamic doctrine which has no race "racist", and then lies about her own associates who though perpetrating the violence she proclaims to instead be "victims". From the ABC TV Lateline transcript of the audio to the video:
"YASMIN SHAMSIL, STUDENTS FOR PALESTINE: We were just standing there while actually, like, a number of people were charging at us, are hurting us. There are actually people in here with bloody noses and these are all the demonstrators who are actually just peacefully trying to raise awareness of the fact that we oppose Islamophobia and all the things that Geert Wilders and the people who come to Geert Wilders' event preach." ( http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2013/s3694073.htm )
The footage clearly shows Shamsili standing alongside Yarra Socialist Party members, and Yarra Council candidates obstructing entry to those seeking to attend the Geert Wilders speech.
It was Sahmsili's associates who were forcibly removed by the police, not the people who came to hear Wilders.
Shamsili has lied and blamed the victims for what her associates did.
It is the associates of Shamsili who are filmed charging at, and pushing, prospective attendees to the ground. It is the protesters who obstruct the path of the prospective attendees. It is the group Shamsili is with who are doing the “hurting” to others.
The violence condemned by Shamsili is the violence perpetrated by her own group.
Shamsili herself can be seen yelling at people. Shamsili is NOT "just standing there" as passive observer. By grabbing people and throwing them to the ground, the demonstrators do not constitute a definition of "just peacefully trying to raise awareness” as Shamsili claims.
Shamsili is supporting the use of violence against people who were clearly not violent, by claiming that the perpetrators of the violence are instead the victims of the violence.
The footage from ABC TV (Australia) also appears on the ABC News site. Appended to the same footage is the following summary:
"A large group of angry protesters has scuffled with people attending a Melbourne speech by controversial Dutch MP Geert Wilders... about 200 protesters wrestled with those trying to access the venue at Somerton, in the city's north. The demonstrators took guests' tickets and pushed them to the ground." ( http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-02-19/clashes-ahead-of-geert-wilders27-speech/4528388 )
Protesters wrestling those trying to access the venue cannot accurately be described as wrestling “with” each other. This was one group acting against another who were its victims.
The objective in Sahmsili's exercise, is evident by what transpired and the lies told by her on behalf of the Students for Palestine in which violent acts are undertaken and then blamed on the group they attacked, accusing them of being violent instead. The readiness shown to accept that critics of Islam are violent because violence is used against them is seriously disgraceful, and shows that there is a willingness to hate simply for the sake of it.
Shamsili is no stranger to anti Jewish rallies. She partook in a rally organised by the Students for Palestine that marched from RMIT to the State Library, in which her associate, known as “Delinquent” referred to those against whom she campaigned as “vermin”, reminiscent of anti-Jewish Nazi propaganda.
The accusation of “racist” used against anyone criticising Islam - has become de rigueur in countries such as Australia and England.
Cripps, like the “Students for Palestine” protestors, made accusations such as those made by Shamsili, in which he alleged “heated exchanges” occurred between he and us. Like the Students for Palestine it did not matter that it was he alone who was heated, angry and aggressive. Our dispassionate, rejection of his allegations however have been misrepresented, in the same manner as the Students for Palestine group, who misrepresented the target of their anger as being co-perpetrators simply because they were on the receiving end of aggression.
There is a desire to label any critic of Islam to be predisposed to violent or aggressive behaviour; and so acting either violently or aggressively toward a critic of Islam is misrepresented as being an attribute of both parties. Liars such as Robert Cripps and Yasemin Shamsili project their violence and hatreds onto others. And this country's legal apparatus has, to date, shown itself to be complicit.
Yasemin Shamsili is, according to her Monash University "Academia" page a Department Member at Monash University and interested in political philosophy (below):
Melbourne tabloid newspaper, "the Age" columnist, Soutphommasane is an accademic, and political philosopher at Monash University according to his Monash University page (see below). Soutphommasane wrote to criticise Wilders and praised as “tolerance” the actions of those protesting against Wilders who threw people to the ground.
When Adolf Hitler expressed "his" sentiments in Mein Kampf, they were the sentiments that had been made respectable by pre-Nazi German academics and university student unions. A similar path is being followed today in Australia by its own academics.
email author ophion at internode.on.net
No comments allowed? If you are passionate and want to comment, there is nothing that prevents you from writing your own blog. I have a disdain for the kind of commentary made by those who hide behind an avatar.