EMISCO and the Ongoing Push Against “Islamophobia” by the OSCE

The following report was written by the Counterjihad Collective after several members attended an EMISCO side event today at the OSCE/HDIM conference in Warsaw.

This morning’s side event “The Consequences of Islamophobic Discourse in the European Political Parties” was hosted by EMISCO and chaired by Bashy Quraishy, the General Secretary of EMISCO (European Muslim Initiative for Social Cohesion). the panel was top-heavy with speakers giving country reports on Islamophobia in Europe.. The presentations seemed forced and overloaded in the sense that little time was able to be allotted for questions.

The forum was structured so that the closing statements, given by Bülent Şenay, were delivered after the question-and-answer period to ensure a final word. The panel seemed defensive, with panel members making strident statements about various political parties, labeling them as “racist” and “Islamophobic”. Building on narratives emphasized in 2014, their efforts were aimed at escalating the Islamophobia rhetoric in the guise of racism and gender, with all of the women appearing in head coverings, amid a constant reference to the wearing of headscarves. Also of note was a peculiar omission: the materials associated with side event did not provide the names of the briefers.

Because EMISCO and the Turkish complement were force to acknowledge that the term “Islamophobia” lacks a definition, this question was presented again in this forum. The other question concerned the definition of “new form of racism not based on skin color” and “manifestations of racism” as well. The panel did not answer the question on racism. Quraishy answered that Islamophobia was not about reasonable disagreements. In his closing remarks, however, Bülent Şenay became visibly agitated, went off his prepared notes (he said) and forcefully declared that our asking the question was both Islamophobic and ridiculous because “we all know what it means” and hence “I won’t define it.” He went on to insist, however, that “we must define Islamophobia as a crime.” Of course, defining Islamophobia is an issue because criminalizing an activity that lacks a definition is a serious civil rights and verges on the criminalization of thought.

Professor Bülent Şenay speaks under color of some authority, which makes his observations something more than just the comments of a professor. The professor sits on the OSCE Human Rights Advisory Council, is a founding member of the Governing Board of EMISCO, and was the Diplomatic Counsel¬or for Religious and Cultural Affairs at the Turkish Embassy in The Hague from 2008 to 2012. In September 2013, Professor Şenay oversaw the drafting of a declaration that defined Islamophobia as “a groundless fear and intolerance of Islam and Muslims” that is “detrimental to international peace” such that there “should be recogni¬tion of Islamophobia as a hate crime and Islamophobic attitudes as human rights violations.” The declaration was written for the “International Conference on Islamophobia: Law & Media” in Istanbul, which was co-sponsored by Turkey’s Directorate General of Press and Information and the OIC. At the conference, Turkish President Erdoğan stated that “Islamophobia” is a “kind of racism” that is “a crime against humanity.” In 2014, Şenay felt comfortable chiding the Western audience by saying, “if I were to present a particular favor, this would be the title, ‘A New Cultural ISIS — International Strong Ignorance Syndrome’” as he presented his briefing with the title, “Is¬lamophobia in the 21st Century: International Strong Ignorance Syndrome in Europe (ISIS).” In doing so, Şenay was suggesting that the extremism was in the reactions of the West, not in the acts of ISIS.

For links to previous articles about the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, see the OSCE Archives.

11 thoughts on “EMISCO and the Ongoing Push Against “Islamophobia” by the OSCE

  1. “Professor Şenay oversaw the drafting of a declaration that defined Islamophobia as “a groundless fear and intolerance of Islam and Muslims””

    Well, no worries then. The fear of Islam is anything but groundless, rather it is entirely well-founded to anyone with a passing knowledge of the Koran.

  2. I don’t even give this stuff a minute of my time now. These people are beyond description and outside even “madness” or normal human behaviour. They thrust themselves everywhere in our faces, commit atrocities across the globe, riot, steal demand, butcher, decapitate. 379,000,000 deaths in 1400 years and several highly advanced civilisations destroyed and insist they are “The best of people”? Yet what have they produced apart from death and destruction?

    Then there is the “Left” who are not much better. As we die we must celebrate with tea and cakes our own dying and enjoy it? “Psychopaths” does not even begin to describe it.

  3. They suffer from “Rationalphobia”- an inability to think and act within the bounds of rational behaviour. What about “humanphobia”- A fear of being human?

  4. Given the war on terror, and accepting that fear is a mild form of terror, it’s perfectly logical that this particular fear, clinically and expertly diagnosed (although not defined) as “islamophobia”, and by extension all carriers of the dis-ease, ie. “islamophobics”, be targeted for destruction.. I wonder, however, when all the other phobias which plague mankind will be outlawed? And will allergies be targeted also?

  5. One would think, that Muslims have other problems at hand then propagate something like this so called Islamophobia (which was created by the Muslim Brotherhood and the Iranian Regime on the basis of Muharaba /Mohareb – Enmity to God).

    Fe. the Islamic-barbarism of the IS, al-Nusra, Boko Haram etc. pp. (including beheading, slavery, burning people alive…).
    Or the social and educational backwardness of muslim countries, the bloody conflict between Sunni and Shia, or the lack of human rights, the complete disrespect for other religions or atheists in their countries and beyond.
    But no, there is only one REAL problem – speaking out what Islam is: a totalitarian, inhumane, greedy, bloody ideology.
    What a bunch of jerks!

    • [I disagree]

      The only problem for Muslims is to spread Islam.

      If you don’t scratch that itch, you can have a limited alliance with one set of Muslims against another set, like the Saudis fighting the Iranians.

      The sophisticated Muslims, like the Muslim Brotherhood leadership, or this Bülent Şenay (might be one and the same) are very aware of the intricacies of Western government and culture, and use it to full advantage. It’s like taking an airplane to go to a conference on banning fossil fuels.

      If the West ever gets a leader again who is committed to his own country, rather than to globalism, I don’t believe it would be that difficult to play to Muslims idiosyncrasies, just as they play to ours.

      Truth to tell, I don’t even think it would harm relations that much with places like Saudi Arabia to simply enact a ban on Muslim visas. The Saudis were always pragmatic: whatever kept them in power, they were in favor of. They sponsored Islamic infiltration in the US, and even the Muslim Brotherhood, probably to save face or as a hobby, but they would understand if they were shut out (though they wouldn’t admit it).

      The big stickler is our deficit spending. As long as the US insists on huge budget deficits and financing them by bonds they sell to foreign countries, our government is in thrall. It’s the perfect win-win-win for Obama. On thinking about it, the only real benefit of the current situation is, it practically guarantees that Obama won’t attempt a coup to become dictator. He understands, I think, that the collapse of the currency might occur on the next shift, and is happy to leave it with Hillary.

      What I’m saying is, Islam can be handled by following fundamental principles pretty much consistent with our civilization ethos, if we have the will to do so.

  6. Muslim Cohesion?
    Sounds like an oxymoron or some other fancy word.
    Can they even cohese in their own midst?

  7. Read Coughlin’s “Catastrophic Failure.”

    He details how the OIC and associated organizations studied the gay movement and their construction of the “homophobia” concept and its effectiveness when they sat down to create the concept of “Islamophobia.”

    Yet another example of how the Ummah are able to play the Western media and psyche like a fiddle.

Comments are closed.