Reflections on a World Gone Mad, Part 1

As we reported last week, the fifth annual Forum of the UN Alliance of Civilizations met in Vienna on February 27th and 28th. The official goals of the AoC consist of vague feel-good bromides, but practically speaking, its primary purpose is to implement the program of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. In particular, the AoC is keen to crack down on “defamation of religions”.

Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff attended last week’s events in Vienna. She has filed a account on what she observed, and discusses the larger ramifications of the AoC in the ongoing Islamization of the West.

The report below is the first in a three-part series.

Reflections on a World Gone Mad
Part 1: Chamberlain is cloned!

by Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

“One of the major tasks of our generation is to build a global community, where people of all persuasions can live together in harmony and mutual respect.”
            — Karen Armstrong, AoC goodwill ambassador

“The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one’s real and one’s declared aims, one turns, as it were, instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish squirting out ink.”
            — George Orwell

“Dialogue means persuasion through threats, ‘cross-cultural understanding’ is translated as submission.”
            — Bat Ye’or, in Europe, Globalization
                and the Coming of the Universal Caliphate

In past decades, there has been a more or less covert movement to deliberately dissolve the sovereignty of nation-states, particularly in Europe. Decisions regarding politics, culture and information which should be taken on a national or even a local level have been relegated to a great extent to an international level represented by organizations such as the Anna Lindh Foundation or the Alliance of Civilizations, both of which are, putting it mildly, obscure and unknown to the public. The sinister instruments used in these organizations are called “dialogue”, “peace and harmony”, “partnerships”, and “multiculturalism”. According to eminent scholar Bat Ye’or:

Europeans are hemmed by a game of multiple mirrors, which radiate at every level and into infinity, prefabricated opinions in accordance with political and cultural agendas, of which they know nothing and often disapprove, but which they finance with their taxes. […] This opaque, elitist system undermines democracy. It also lacks visibility, doubling and multiplying itself like a hydra into networks and sub-networks. (Bat Ye’or, Europe, Globalization and the Coming of the Universal Caliphate, p. 125-6)

The setting could not have been more bizarre: the Vienna Hofburg, the hub of the former Austro-Hungarian Empire, all glitzed up and shiny, hosted the most undemocratic event imaginable outside North Korea’s borders. The Austrian monarchy can be hailed a beacon of democracy compared to the Alliance of Civilizations, which celebrated its 5th Global Forum in Vienna, sucking up financial and other precious resources and taxes along the way and producing — unsurprisingly — no tangible results.

More than 1,000 men and women attended this forum, young and old, clergy and imams, from near and far, all in perpetual smiles, chatting with each other in the imperial hallways about how to make the world a better place, all the while ignoring the usual elephant in the (Hofburg) castle. Peace and harmony for 72 hours, then it was a collective exodus to the airport to return to reality. In fact, for these 72 hours, the Forum completely negated the outside world, as if the inter-religious tensions existed only in the minds of a few loonies, and if there were only more talk about peace and harmony, these loonies would acknowledge their idiocies and disappear in history’s dustbins. Irksomely, these men and women constituted a non-elected body, for not one spoke for himself, but rather identified with a group, most likely with a Muslim group.

In light of the Alliance’s evil machinations, and before we delve into the actual meeting, it is well worth the effort to examine its origins and aims. The 2004 attacks in Madrid perpetrated by “Muslim extremists” shocked Spain, toppled its (conservative) government, and gave birth to the creation of the Alliance of Civilizations, which — in the words of the inimitable Bat Ye’or —

“would operate in the political and cultural spheres of the rapprochement of Islam and the West, thereby fulfilling the wishes of the OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation). […] This fell to a UN strategy on a world-wide scale. […] This project was not [Spanish prime minister] Zapatero’s but the OIC’s — Zapatero merely became their European representative.” (p. 93)

The Spanish university professor Isaias Barrenada argues that the name of the Alliance itself is misleading, lacking correspondence with its content. Furthermore, he adds, “it is very difficult to define ‘civilization’, which tends to be identified with religion and culture. What constitutes a civilization today? Who represents it? Who speaks on its behalf? The Center for Inquiry [pdf], in turn, condemns the Alliance’s lack of “discussion of Islamist movements and organizations world-wide; the question of tensions between Islamic law and government and universal human rights norms.”

Then-UN Secretary General Kofi Annan then set about selecting personalities for the Alliance’s so-called High Level Group which would be in charge of solving the clash of civilizations once and for all. The members of the HLG were not elected nor did the public even know about the creation of this group, nor does any member represent a secularist organization. This is significant, since the HLG adopted the Islamic view of history, shifting all the blame onto the West for any and all conflicts. Colonialism and Zionism, of course, are at the top of the list of shame.

The HLG, in the name of the Alliance’s 100-plus members, decided — without any democratic process or discussion — that “world conflicts are reduced to conflicts between the privileged and the poor, between the powerful and the weak, because […] poverty leads to despair and alienation.” (Bat Ye’or, Europe, p. 94) An action plan was recommended to “reduce conflicts through affirmation of mutual respect between peoples, creating a relationship that gives special attention to relations between Western and Muslim societies.” (p. 95) All of this takes place in the hope of reducing hostility and promoting harmony among nations and cultures of the world. Apart from the fact that these plans will influence millions of people in Europe and the United States and Canada, none of these millions of citizens have been informed of, let alone asked about, the Alliance’s deals and plans, while the interests of the OIC are being implemented through the backdoor. Before we move on, a few questions come to mind immediately:

1.   What does reducing hostility mean?
2.   What is the definition of harmony?
3.   What does the promotion of harmony entail?

But apparently there is no need for any definition, as we shall see later. Makes dialogue and harmony much easier, doesn’t it?

Bat Ye’or’s assessment of the reports issued by the High Level Group is devastating. They are

“unilateral, granting the United Nations, the OIC and international organizations the right to determine the policies, laws, culture and thought processes of [500] million Europeans [and Americans]. It is an international, multipolar, fascist-type and totalitarian government that carries out such a cultural inquisition [that] would replace their democratically elected national systems. Conclaves acting without the public’s knowledge insert their decisions by means of networks, partnerships and ‘representatives of civil society’, who have been elected by no one but themselves and paid by mysterious humanitarian ‘foundations’ aiming at world ‘peace and justice’. (pp. 108-9)

Next: Ignoring the central problem of our times

For more on the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, see the OIC Archives.

18 thoughts on “Reflections on a World Gone Mad, Part 1


  2. Thank you for your reporting, Elisabeth. Not an easy event to attend, if you do not see just the shiny surface.

  3. From a European perspective ;
    1. What does reducing hostility mean?
    Dissent and the refusal to submit to being an economic and social pawn in the EUrabian grand plan is ‘hostility’.So marginalising,ostracising and/or criminalising dissenters would definitely reduce ‘hostility’.
    Also making the media report in a more ‘neutral’ towards Islam as suggested by the EurIslam study.With the possible uses for the EU’s nascent internal security apparatus to crush ‘disharmony’ and reduce ‘hostility’,I truly dread to think where it all might end.
    2. What is the definition of harmony?
    In EU speak’ harmonising’ is the ongoing processes on the road to ‘convergence’ (another term in need of definition) .’Convergence’ could be achieved when Europeans are a minority in Europe,the EU covers an area bigger than the Roman Empire,it acquires faster than light spacecraft ,everyone stops using money and will concentrate on self improvement.(apologies to sci-fi fans) .
    3. What does the promotion of harmony entail ?
    Promoting ‘harmony’ means never questioning ‘ever closer union’ or the Islamification of Europe,while propagandising for the EU,EZ and multikulti,regardless of how devastating these are to the social and economic stability of individual nation states.Ignoring the persecution of minorities in Muslim majority countries and the intrinsic supremacist message of Islam is another way of promoting ‘harmony’.
    Political Correctness and willful blindness go hand in hand with the ‘promotion of harmony’.
    So ‘promoters’ will either be on the payroll,on the make,deluded or hiding an agenda.

  4. Y’know all this rubbish spouted by self appointed ‘intellectuals’ really annoys me, and needs exposing for the puerile, simplistic, utopian nonsense that it is. It is not ‘fear of the other’ or ‘inequality’ or ‘poverty’ that causes wars. It is usually ‘clever’ people like them, who think they have the answer to every problem, if only people would listen, and when they don’t listen feel the moral imperative to impose their views on others in an increasingly forceful manner. THEY are the source of disharmony, THEY are the fomenters of discontent. Left to their own devices people would just get on with their lives, ordinary people, of all persuasions would get on together without these grievance mongers continually trying to control how everyone thinks and lives.
    The ‘ordinary people’ DID NOT feel the need to go to Iraq and bomb them into democracy, in fact they had to be lied to to get them to swallow it. ‘The poor’ of europe, of Britain, Germany, France, didn’t decide to fight each other in 1914, it took a massive press campaign to whip them into a frenzy, in fact, given the chance, they sang each other carol’s and played soccer.Without the demented imams, constantly goading the people of the islamic world, endlessly preaching hatred and death, the people would just get on with tending their fields, looking after their families.
    The ‘ordinary people’ aren’t the problem, people like the ones that attend these meetings are, people who are so puffed up with their ego that they HAVE to poke their nose into everyone else’s business, to take offence on behalf of the unoffended, to take umbrage on behalf of the content. To force people to live out their ever more painful social experiments in the name of ‘the common good’. They aren’t the answer THEY ARE THE PROBLEM !

    • Very true. The oil sheiks and the high islamic clerics should be the target of our hatred. Luckily, the people in e.g. Qatar become complacent.

  5. I was there with Elisabeth, and it certainly was a most overwhelming experience. That I consider intentional, in that it intends to make you fell small, yet part of something BIG! That has been tried before in history, at times labeled “Fascism”.

    Now, being there does not make me feel part of it, my allegiance to human rights, and in particular inalienable individual rights, trumps the madness we walked through. It is difficult to capture in words just how unreal and void of meaning this thing was.

    There is a lot that can be reported, but the hard part is to dig through the deluge of useless sweet-talk and get to the beef, and to make that a worthwhile read, too.

    One point worth mentioning is that all countries participating (that’s pretty much every country on Earth – apart from Israel, the epicenter of sanity) have signed up to supporting the “Cause of the Palestinians”! Most governments probably don’t even know that.

    One approach to counter this juggernaut is to question it. What does “Tolerance” mean? Please define what “Dialogue” the AoC is seeking, and what the result of that is supposed to be. “Human rights” – which human rights? The Cairo Declaration?

    Another is to follow the money. Given that Turkey and Qatar are heavily involved, I believe they’d be footing a major part of the bills, too. They do so only for good reasons…

  6. It seems to be an alliance of islamist theocrats, socialist/fascist totalitarians, nihilists and “global village” idiots against The Civilization.
    I’m not surprised at all …

  7. Saladin days
    – What…Where..? – Oslo

    Brotherhood, sharia and democracy

    Lecture by
    Ibrahim El-Houdaiby “researcher”, writer and one of the main Tahrir square activists. He is also the grandson of leading brotherhood ideologist El-Houdaiby.

    This lecture is part of the so called Saladin Days 2013, organized by islamophiles in Norway, and moreover, financed by Norwegian taxpayers, by order of government, Ministry of Foreign Affairs

  8. A very interesting and well-written perspective on an important event.

    However, I think ESW’s phrase “In light of the Alliance’s evil machinations…” is unfortunate. While certainly the OIC element of the Alliance is evil, the precise problem is that their evil is able to gain traction and influence among people who are not evil, but only sincerely starry-eyed and benighted in their PC MC.

  9. I thank God every day for people like Elizabeth. Brave individuals who see through the mendacity that has seized the world in a time of utter madness. Instead of defending our great Western civilization, the Leftists are capitulating with a bunch of barbaric cutthroats who are hellbent on destroying everything we have accomplished over centuries.

    These Leftists, who are nothing but a bunch of traitors, have no idea what they are dealing with. They will be the first ones the Moslems will either convert or slit their throats.

    Beware all Leftists. They hate our civilization and are using Islam to destroy it. The only thing is that in the end they will not be able to control their Frankenstein’s monster.

  10. Pingback: Reflections on a World Gone Mad, Part 2 | Gates of Vienna

  11. Pingback: Alliance of what? Reflections on a World Gone Mad — Winds Of Jihad By SheikYerMami

  12. Pingback: Reflections on a World Gone Mad, Part 3 | Gates of Vienna

  13. Pingback: Reflections on a World Gone Mad: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff’s Report From The Recent Meeting of The UN Alliance of Civilizations :: Liberties Alliance

  14. Pingback: Reflections on a World Gone Mad, Part 1 |

  15. Pingback: Reflections on a World Gone Mad, Part 3 |

  16. Pingback: A UN Alliance Against Western Values | Gates of Vienna

Comments are closed.