“Without a clear definition of the concept, no consensus about it can be reached.”
As reported here last month, Harald Fiegl, speaking on behalf of the Austrian organization Mission Europa Netzwerk Karl Martell at the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) meeting in Vienna, requested that the term “Islamophobia” be properly defined before being used by the OSCE or other institutions.
Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff points out that this is not the first time that Dr. Fiegl has spoken out about that slippery and malign concept, “Islamophobia”. Last September at a press conference in Sarajevo, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan remarked that Islamophobia should be designated a crime against humanity. Mr. Erdoğan’s statement prompted Dr. Fiegl to write to the Austrian Vice Chancellor, Dr. Michael Spindelegger. Below is the response he received from Dr. Spindelegger’s office.
Many thanks to JLH for the translation:
Federal Ministry for European and International Affairs
Vienna, December 21, 2012
Mr. Harald Fiegl
Dear Mr. Fiegl:
Vice Chancellor and Minister for European and International Affairs Dr. Michael Spindelegger has requested that I reply to your communication of September 20.
I am familiar with the cited discussion and I share your view that under international law the concept “Islamophobia” is not a straightforward, and is therefore a problematic concept. Proceeding from your interpretations, we may assume that “Islamophobia” (hostility to Islam per se) — without the further qualification of criminal action — does not as a rule satisfy the qualifications for crimes against humanity.
Austria is following with interest the discussion of “Islamophobia,” including at this year’s Human Dimension Implementation Meeting in Warsaw. The concluding report says: “A number of speakers addressed the issues of ‘Islamophobia.’ Concern was expressed over wide-spread demonization of Islam and Muslims, while one speaker requested that the term itself, as well as the concept of “religious hatred” should be clarified, or avoided.”
A purely political judgment on “Islamophobia” in the framework of the OSCE is quite possible in the future. It would, however, have to be preceded by a comprehensive and thorough discussion, wherein the reservations you have noted from the Austrian point of view — but also from others — would be included. Without a clear definition of the concept, no consensus about it can be reached. To that extent, “Islamophobia” will remain in the OSCE, pending further clear discussion, which will be followed very attentively by Austria.
Yours truly.
Dr. Friedrich Stift
So Austria has a problem with the definition of Islamophobia. So do Mission Europa Netzwerk Karl Martell, Bürgerbewegung Pax Europa (BPE), and International Civil Liberties Alliance (ICLA).
Why doesn’t the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) have a problem with it?
For links to previous articles about the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, see the OSCE Archives.
I thought “democracies” are ruled by the people, for the people, … etc. But in real life they are ruled by Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Oops the truth is stranger than fiction.
It’s the golden rule….he who has the gold, makes the rules.
What the Muslims have is only “gold”, because we allow it to be…
A classical case of comprador bourgeoisie in service of Saudi imperialism. We should weaken Saudi imperialism from within by demanding legalization of abortion and birth control in Saudi-Arabia. Even Mohammed himself could be enchanted(not just by women but also by magic spells), so sorcery does have chance. Hold placards of George Soros when holding rallies in favor of abortion in KSA. Remember Cairo 1994.
How about if we weaken Saudi imperialism by opening all our public lands to exploration and drilling? Frack here, frack now!
Tying up vast acres of what could be private property (generating tax revenues and tapping fossil fuel deposits) and leaving those millions of acres permanently under the ‘management’ of the government is a socialist tenet. Worship and respect for Gaia, see? Failing to be genuine stewards of the land – no one really owns that land so there’s no personal investment – the nihilist dogma of cultural Marxism insures a not-so-benign neglect of our resources.
But be of good cheer: the Chinese will own it all eventually. Their dogmas may derive from an equally totalitarian system, but they’re not stupid. The riches of the land will be harvested down to the last drop of oil and the final toothpick.
While I am certainly of the opinion that the Chinese are quite a bit cleverer than most people realize, I wouldn’t go so far as to claim that they’re not stupid.
The Communist regime in Beijing has burned through its allotted portion of the Mandate of Heaven with remarkable speed. They have set the stage for a regime change that will be terrifying in its totality. But they seem to have postponed it till after the fall of the global finance system on which America and Europe are currently dependent.
Oil is the gold of today. The only way to shift the power away is to ensure that oil is less necessary in the entire world. More nuclear, new Thorium based power generators, waterflow/wind/sunshine/themal based soutions, more research on alternative sources like LENR and related concepts.
I can’t help thinking, why don’t we have this type of discussion about Hindus or Sikhs.
Why is it always Islam.
I am old enough to remember Hindus being in England in the 1940s and there were no problems then.
The concept of “Islamophobia” is dhimmitude, a spuriously devised neologism deployed by Islamic supremacist and muscular liberal race rage practitioners to prosecute and silence political opponents and the incidental dissent of the targeted population.
Bingo
Does not a single individual member of the OSCE wonder why “Islamophobia” is such a new, yet insufficiently defined phenomenon? It’s much like which came first the chicken (Islamic hegemony) or the egg (Islamophobia)? A “phobia” isn’t born in a vacuum. Will they consider the changes in the European arena which birthed this strange new phobia as they come to terms with it’s full meaning?
>>Why is it always Islam.
>>I am old enough to remember Hindus being in England in
>>the 1940s and there were no problems then.
Islam always keeps its head down, until it is strong enough to take over the nation. They now think they are strong enough. In some respects they have played their hand too soon, as someone else once said, and so they may have woken the lion before they needed to.
.