United States Action

 

Jeffrey Imm Articles

Back to US Action Home Page

075. Jihad, Islamism, and the United Nations
February 1, 2008
http://counterterrorismblog.org/2008/02/islamism_and_un.php

Jihad, Islamism, and the United Nations

By Jeffrey Imm

 

In the ongoing battle against Jihad, the most important advances are not tactical, but rather those advances that allow us to define, address, and counter the ideology behind Jihadist actions. As the 9/11 Commission report states, "Islamist terrorism is an immediate derivative of Islamism." (Notes, Part 12, Note 3, page 562) Recently, a little-noticed advance in countering Islamist ideology was achieved in the one of the least likely places of all: the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC).

The UNHRC has a reputation of being used by its Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) nation members for an endless litany of condemnations exclusively on Israel; it has condemned Israel 15 times in less than 2 years. The UNHRC is also notorious for its refusal to condemn Hamas or any other Islamist organizations. Furthermore, the UNHRC's commissioner Louise Arbour recently welcomed the ratification of the Arab Charter on Human Rights which equates Zionism with racism; her office issued a separate statement noting the charter was "not in conformity with General Assembly Resolution 46/86, which rejects that Zionism is a form of racism."

But in a December resolution on protection of religions, the majority of the UNHRC broke ranks from the OIC's Islamist vision for a moment, offering instead a resolution that could be used to challenge both Islamism and Sharia. While it is not likely that UNHRC will use the "remedial measures" in this resolution to challenge Islamism, it provides a basis for such measures and for related debate that should be leveraged by those fighting Jihad and by those who seek to determine the role of political Islamism in Islamist terrorism. At a minimum, the UNHRC should be held accountable as to why it does not seek "remedial measures" regarding Islamist injustices, in accordance with its own resolution protecting religions. Most importantly, this provides another forum to draw the distinctions between Islam and political Islamism in the effort to address and confront the roots of Islamist terrorism, as part of a larger effort than merely addressing tactical operations of Jihadists.
 

A. Tool to Challenge Anti-Democratic Islamism

On December 14, 2007, the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) passed resolution A/HRC/6/L.15/Rev.1 "Elimination of all forms of intolerance and of discrimination based on religion or belief", which was widely and inaccurately reported to only address discrimination against Islam. In fact, this UNHRC resolution condemns "Islamophobia, anti-Semitism and Christianophobia" (paragraph 2), urges states to allow "the right to practice freely one's religion, including the right to change one's religion or belief" (paragraph 9.a), and urges states to make it illegal for "advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to... violence" (paragraph 9.d).

In seeking to protect the religious rights of the individual (rather than the protection of religious rights based on organizations), as demonstrated by resolution A/HRC/6/L.15/Rev.1's defense of the right to "change one's religion", this resolution provides a clear distinction from the goals of political Islamist organizations and Sharia law. Under Sharia law, the changing of religion (from Islam to another religion) is illegal, and a number of Islamist states have apostasy laws forbidding such an individual choice of religious freedom.

Notably, 15 Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) nations in the UNHRC abstained from voting on this resolution, as they felt this resolution conflicted with the OIC's support for Sharia, which is fundamental to their Islamist view of "human rights", as described in the 1990 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam. Pakistan (representing the OIC) urged for an Amendment to this resolution via A/HRC/6/L.49 to eliminate verbiage about the right to change one's religion. Saudi Arabia felt that the resolution "went against Sharia law", and Egypt felt that resolution needed to be applied "within the context of the tenets of Islam."

This A/HRC/6/L.15/Rev.1 resolution also stated "that no religion should be equated with terrorism" (paragraph 13) and this demonstrates the crux of the challenge with the political ideology of Islamism. Almost none of the OIC states could support this resolution, because their commitment is not the promotion of Islam as a religion, respecting diversity among Islamic practitioners (including allowing its members to change religions), but the promotion of the political ideology of Islamism, using a legal tool of Sharia to enforce one view of Islam as an anti-democratic political ideology. The efforts by pro-Islamists to obtain dual status of Islamism as both a political ideology and a religion failed in this UNHRC resolution. In effect, while Islam should not be equated with terrorism per this resolution, the political ideology of Islamism remains a target for criticism because of the inherent anti-democratic, anti-religious freedom nature of political Islamism itself.

The ongoing fight against the ideology behind Jihad should leverage the UNHRC resolution's calls to "recommend remedial measures" to address questions that the U.N. and the UNHRC have failed to address in the past. Per the 9/11 Commission Report, "Islamist terrorism" finds its ideological basis in Islamism, and such an anti-democratic ideology should be challenged in the actions of states and organizations that have accountability to the United Nations.


B. Remedial Measures Required Based On This Resolution

Some of the areas where such U.N. "remedial measures" regarding Islamist laws, actions, and threats to human rights should be sought could include the following objectives. While it is unlikely that the UNHRC would ever take "remedial measures" on such manners, world opinion should continue to press the UNHRC and the United Nations to get answers as to why it won't take such action:

 

1. "Remedial Measures" against Islamist Organizations with a basis in religious hatred.

An example of such an organization is the Hamas organization. As has been previously reported to the UNHRC, the Hamas covenant remains based on apocryphal document of religious hatred against Jewish people that was referenced in Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf - "The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion." While hardly the only element of religious hate in the Hamas ideology, the "Protocols" provide an unquestionable example of the level of religious hatred that permeates the Hamas ideology, and are directly incorporated in Article 32 of the Hamas Covenant. The failure to educate the public on such religious hate groups as Hamas may be in part why some American jurors in the recent U.S. Holy Land Foundation Trial failed to appreciate the threat of Hamas.

Moreover, the Hamas religious intolerance is not only to Jews, but also extends to other Muslims, as shown in documented efforts by Hamas to control prayer of other Muslims. The only comments by the UNHRC about Hamas after the passing of this resolution have been to criticize Israel for not continuing to supply Hamas-led Gaza with utilities to build bombs to attack Israel. It is past time for the UNHRC to act in accordance with its own resolution on A/HRC/6/L.15/Rev.1 on the Hamas organization.


2. "Remedial Measures" against Islamist Apostasy Laws.

One of the aspects of political Islamism that the OIC nations sought to defend in this "freedom of religion" resolution was to allow the use of Islamist Sharia to punish those who change religions. However, this UNHRC resolution expressly defends such a right to change religions, which Islamists call "apostates". This UNHRC resolution therefore should challenge any Islamist apostate law, any Islamist action against "apostates", and any declaration that would permit such anti-freedom actions. This would no doubt require condemnation of the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, which is based on Sharia, and does not recognize such rights.

The UNHRC should take against Islamist apostate laws in every Islamist nation, including the actions in Afghanistan, where the "democratically" elected Afghanistan parliament sought the death penalty for an "apostate" in 2006. This anti-democratic apostasy law is used by Islamists to threaten death towards any who disagree with their views.  The term "apostate" is used by Islamists like Abu Bakar Bashir to intimidate those who support anti-terrorist measures. The U.N. should take "remedial measures" against nations of Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Yemen, Iran, Sudan, and Mauritania where such apostasy laws have a death penalty.


 

3. "Remedial Measures" against Islamist Blasphemy Laws.

One of the other attempts to crush religious freedom is the use of "blasphemy laws" as part of Islamist governance, which are used to intimidate, torture, and kill individuals who don't share an Islamist government's political ideology. Invented evidence, false testimony, and extreme reactions are leverage to intimidate and threaten those of other religions or with different opinions. For example, in Pakistan, a man asked a group of Muslims having a service to not sing too loud as the family was in mourning for a dead relative. These actions were translated into "blasphemy", with a death sentence for Younis Masih.  Pakistan is notorious for such blasphemy law abuses as a tool of religious violence.  The Pakistan Shariat Court ruled that anyone that is convicted of blasphemy should get the death penalty, under Section 295C of the Pakistan Penal Code, which states, "Whoever by words, either spoken or written or by visible representation, or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Mohammed shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to a fine".   The word of only one "witness" is necessary to incriminate a "heretic".
 

On January 23, in "democratic" Afghanistan, an Afghan journalist Sayed Parwez Kaambakhsh was sentenced to death for distributing an article about the number of wives that someone could have, which was written by his brother. An Afghanistan court viewed this as "insulting Islam", and the journalist was sentenced to death. On January 30, the Afghanistan senate, called the Meshrano Jirga (House of Elders), endorsed the actions of the Afghan court in this death sentence for "blasphemy". As one Afghan member of parliament states, Islamist law is being used in Afghanistan today to repress its population. In a massive understatement, a U.N. organization is investigating the case for "possible misuse of the judicial process".

In November 2007 in "democratic" Indonesia, members of Al-Qiyadah al-Islamiyah Islamic sect were arrested throughout the country, simply because other Muslims in Indonesia did not share their religious beliefs.

Wherever Islamist law allows such charges, "blasphemy" charges will continue to be used to abuse individual rights and rather than "protect" any religion, ensure that those with unpopular religious views are oppressed, tortured, and killed. It is past time for U.N. "remedial measures" on such Islamist laws.


4. "Remedial Measures" against Islamist Political Parties.

As an example, one of the Pakistani Islamist organization leaders that the U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan met with to promote "democracy" in Pakistan is the pro-Taliban Pakistan JUI-F leader Maulana Fazlur Rehman. At the beginning of January, Maulana Fazlur Rehman reiterated his goals to enforce a "true Islamic system" throughout Pakistan via implementation of Sharia law. The implementation and enforcement of Sharia law throughout Pakistan is also the stated goal of the Taliban, frequently repeated by the Taliban. In Pakistan, this problem continues to grow, where the Pakistan North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) has gone from considering Taliban rule of some territories in November to drafting regulations for the establishment of Sharia-based courts in Swat, Dir and Chitral districts.

In Afghanistan, the United Nations has encouraged negotiations between the Afghanistan government and the Taliban in an attempt to "mainstream" the Taliban into a political party. Tom Koenigs, the U.N. Secretary General's Special Envoy in Kabul, may view the Taliban as "multi-faceted", but the fact remains that the Taliban's Islamist position is not only pro-Jihad, but also anti-religious freedom. In the interests of religious freedom, the U.N. should take "remedial measures" to condemn the numerous Islamist political parties throughout Pakistan, Afghanistan, and other nations that promote an anti-democratic ideology.

One of the most widespread Islamist international political organizations, the Muslim Brotherhood represents another Islamist political organization whose ideology is based on seeking Islamist superiority, and which openly promotes religious violence. As shown on January 25 in Jordan, Muslim Brotherhood supporters call for "suicide bombers" and violence to kill, maim, and destroy. The stated objective of the Muslim Brotherhood political organization is: "Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Qur'an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope." It is no accident that Osama bin Laden was influenced by Muslim Brotherhood-linked professors as Sayyid Qutb and his brother Muhammad Qutb. In addition to such support for religious violence, the Muslim Brotherhood political leaders have been documented in calling for unequal rights for non-Muslims and Holocaust denial.

While there have been efforts over the past year to repaint the Muslim Brotherhood as a "moderate" organization, the facts remain that the Muslim Brotherhood's commitment to political Islamism alone demonstrates the anti-democratic nature of the organization. While individuals claim that the Muslim Brotherhood is "evolving", the reality is that when it comes to democratic values such as freedom of religion, Islamist organizations' views on democracy might well echo the words of Mustafa Mashhour, the Muslim Brotherhood’s late Supreme Guide, who said: "Democracy contradicts and wages war on Islam. Whoever calls for democracy means they are raising banners contradicting God’s plan and fighting Islam."

Moreover, Islamist political organizations as the Muslim Brotherhood also attack other Muslims that do not share their views. As documented in October, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt was accused by the Egyptian Interior Ministry "of using iron poles and batons to prevent clerics from holding prayers." Such political Islamists are not only a threat to peace (due to their threats of violence against other religions), but also a threats to other Muslims.

With Muslim Brotherhood branches throughout Egypt, the Middle East, Africa, Europe, United States, and its influence on United States' Muslim organizations (as shown during the Holy Land Foundation trial), the role of such a widespread Islamist political organization with goals that would encourage religious violence and prevent religious freedom makes the Muslim Brotherhood a logical target for "remedial measures" according to the UNHRC resolution.

Moreover, the UNHRC should be required to also seek "remedial measures" against the numerous Islamist expansionist organizations across the world, such as Hizb ut-Tahrir, that seek to promote Islamism as the anti-freedom expansionist vision to deny religious freedom. Last August, Hizb ut-Tahrir president Fadi Abdullati (who owns a previous conviction for publicly urging his members to kill Jews) called for the creation of an Islamist caliphate. Another of its leaders called for use of force to get a union of nations under "common Islamic law". Hizb ut-Tahrir has been associated with Jihadist groups in the United Kingdom, but is yet to be banned. Such organizations have a goal in the expansion of an ideology, which based on denying freedom of religion, to be promulgated across the world. Shouldn't the U.N. resolution to protect religions be the basis of recommendations against such an anti-religious freedom expansionist organizations as Hizb ut-Tahrir?


C. Islamism versus Islam - and the Impact on Religious Freedom.

At the center of the controversy of religious protection versus Islamism is the definition of Islamism itself. The primary protection that Islamist organizations enjoy for their behavior is that such Islamist statements and actions are in accordance with a "religion" and that Sharia is merely "Islamic law". The duality that Islamists seek of being both a political ideology and a religion, as convenient, must be challenged by those who genuinely seek protection of religious freedoms.

The sampling of Islamist challenges (listed in the previous paragraphs) to freedom of religion where the UNHRC resolution should be used to seek "remedial measures" serve as an illustration of precisely why Islamism is not a religion, but is only a political ideology. This UNHRC resolution could help the international community in confronting the cover story used by Islamist organizations - that they represent a religion, rather than a political ideology.

The consequences of acknowledging this reality would be significant for any international organization, especially the United Nations. The UNHRC and the U.N. clearly recognizes an Islamist international organization, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), whose views on Human Rights are not based on those of a democratic society or the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The views of the OIC are firmly based on the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, which states in Article 24: "All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari'ah". It was this same Islamist OIC organization that attempted to shape and edit the very UNHRC resolution on protection of religion, so that it could be used to deny freedom of religion.

But the facts remain that Islamists do not speak for all Muslims, and any organization that seeks to protect religious freedoms must first acknowledge this. Islamist organizations seek to convey themselves as spokespersons for a so-called "Muslim World" -- when, in fact, they only represent political Islamists, and not Muslims who oppose and do not recognize Sharia. In a recent article, Alex Alexiev, Vice President of Research at the Center for Security Policy, points out that Shariah law is not "Islamic law", except as interpreted by Islamists. Alex Alexiev states "shariah is mostly a post-Quranic, man-made medieval doctrine that is almost completely at odds with modern norms of human rights, political freedoms and international relations... and [s]hariah doctrine, though claiming to be derived from the Quran, is thus a politicized interpretation of the Muslim scriptures and other non-revealed sources" [Alexiev article, page 3]. Alex Alexiev further points out that "the word shariah is mentioned only once in the Quran, and not at all as a system of jurisprudence, but in its traditional meaning of the 'right path'" [Alexiev article, page 3].

Other international organizations have spoken out against Islamism. In 2001, the European Court of Human Rights in its Judgment in the case of Refah Partisi (The Welfare Party) Erbakan, Kazan, and Tekdal v. Turkey, stated: "the institution of Sharia law and a theocratic regime, were incompatible with the requirements of a democratic society."

Because the ideology of Islamism tolerates no such religious choice, as seen in the examples in the previous paragraphs, Islamists who choose to use terrorism as a tactic feel that they are acting on behalf of the Islamist ideology. How far is it from seeking the death penalty for an article viewed as "blasphemous" to actually committing terrorist acts against those viewed as "blasphemous"? Political Islamists and Islamist terrorist Osama Bin Laden share the same ultimate goal, as stated by Osama Bin Laden on October 22, 2007: "The greater state of Islam from the ocean to the ocean, Allah permitting."

While the 9/11 Commission Report found that "Islamist terrorism is an immediate derivative of Islamism," the issue of political Islamism remains a subject not addressed by American political leaders. American and international leaders who support democracy and freedom of religion must make their position on Islamism clear. A non-position is a position - one of tolerance and acceptance of an ideology that fuels the very Islamist terrorism that such leaders claim to condemn.

Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, the founder and Chairman of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, stated in a recent column: "This tactic of terror we are fighting will continue to exponentially regenerate itself as long as its fuel remains. The fuel is political Islam - Islamism. Islamism is effectively incubated in a culture like ours in the United States which stubbornly (to our own detriment) refuses to engage political Islam because of its invocation of a faith. The American people need leadership that not only understands the need to bring freedom and liberty to the world, but leadership ready to confront our Islamist enemies with the pathologies of their own ideas - leadership which can separate personal spiritual Islam from political Islam and genuinely engage liberty-minded anti-Islamist Muslims."

While Dr. Jasser's comments are for the American government, certainly they should also be applied to international peace organizations and American allies as well. It is past time for the United Nations, the United States, and our allies to address the issue of Islamism as an ideology behind Islamist terrorism. As long as the free world's standards of action in this war are based on fighting only terrorist tactics, and not recognizing or confronting the ideology that spawns Islamist terrorism, then we have not yet begun to fight.


Sources and Related Documents:

July 18, 2007 - Family Security Matters: "Preventing the West from Understanding Jihad" - Dr. Walid Phares
Islamism - Definition - Wikipedia
U.S. Final Report of the 9/11 Commission - Notes, Part 12, Note 3: "Islamism" (page 562)
-- Adobe Acrobat PDF format
United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) - Wikipedia
United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)
February 1, 2008 - The Jerusalem Post: 'Anti-Zionist' Arab charter inconsistent with UN norms'
January 29, 2008 - The Jerusalem Post: "UNHRC endorsed Arab charter with anti-Semitic provisions"
League of Arab States, Revised Arab Charter on Human Rights, May 22, 2004
Arab Charter on Human Rights - Wikipedia
December 13, 2007 - A/HRC/6/L.49 Amendments to draft resolution L.15/Rev.1: Elimination of all forms of intolerance and of discrimination based on religion or belief -- by Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference
December 11, 2007 - United Nations Resolution A/HRC/6/L.15/Rev.1. "Elimination of all forms of intolerance and of discrimination based on religion or belief"
UN Resolution A/HRC/6/L.15 Versions and documentation (alternative web link)
Human Rights Council extends mandates of experts on internally displaced persons, Sudan, and freedom of religion and belief (scroll down to "Action on Resolution on Mandate of Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief")
December 31, 2007 - The Daily Telegraph: "Don't criticise Islam, says UN"
December 18, 2007 - UN Watch: Human Rights Council abolishes expert group monitoring Darfur (scroll down to "Expert on Freedom of Religion Renewed")
December 14, 2007 - UN Watch: UN Resolution A/HRC/6/L.15/Rev.1 Voting (29 Yes, 2 No, 18 Abstention)
December 7, 2007 - UN Watch: Islamic bid to amend UN religious intolerance resolution
Organization of the Islamic Conference - Wikipedia
Organization of the Islamic Conference - Web Site (English)
Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam - Wikipedia
August 5, 1990, Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, U.N. GAOR, World Conf. on Hum. Rts., 4th Sess., Agenda Item 5, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.157/PC/62/Add.18 (1993) [English translation].
Sharia - Wikipedia
Hamas Convenant - Wikisource
The Protocols in Nazi propaganda, 1930s-1940s
October 23, 2007 - Dallas Morning News: 'There was not enough evidence'
January 24, 2008 - Jerusalem Post: UN rights council condemns Israel's actions in Gaza, W. Bank
September 4, 2007 - Associated Press: Hamas bans public prayer in Gaza
Apostasy in Islam - Wikipedia
March 30, 2006 - Gulf Times: Asylum-seeking convert must not escape: MPs
August 11, 2007 - International Herald Tribune: A Muslim converts to Christianity foments sectarian antagonism
June 27, 2007 - ABC Australia - Bashir wants anti-terrorism force 'eradicated'
April 11, 2006 - Islamists Post Hit List of 'Apostates'
Blasphemy law in Pakistan - Wikipedia
April 27, 2007 - Mob and police torture Catholic man accused of blasphemy
March 28, 2007 - Muslims torture for hours Christian "blasphemer" now in jail
February 3, 2006 - Pakistan: Christian sentenced to death, lawyer threatened
February 1, 2006 - Aftenposten: Norwegian Muslims want blasphemy law
January 8, 2008 - Aftenposten: Norway resident convicted of blasphemy
February 1, 2008 - The Independent: Malalai Joya: My country is using Islamic law to erode the rights of women
January 30, 2008 - AFP: Afghanistan's Senate endorses reporter's death sentence: official -- journalism student Perwiz Kambakhsh accused of blasphemy
January 23, 2008 - Associated Press: Afghan journalist sentenced to death because of brother's writings
January 26, 2008 - Gulf Times: UN urges review of journalist's death sentence
November 7, 2007 - Jakarta Post: Islamic sect leader repents, says al-Qiyadah was misguided
October 29, 2007 - ReligionAndSpirituality.com: Indonesia Muslims call sect 'heretical'
January 19, 2008 - Pakistan Daily Times: Islami Jamiat Talaba (IJT) supports extremists in Waziristan and Swat
January 6, 2008 - Pakistan Link: Pakistan JUI-F leader Maulana Fazlur Rehman vows to enforce true Islamic system in country
November 21, 2007 - Dawn: US envoy meets Fazl
Profile: Maulana Fazlur Rahman
Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam
December 9, 2007 - Times of India: Taliban vows to continue campaign for Shariah in Swat
October 31, 2007 - BBC: Pakistan militants firm on Sharia
November 3, 2007 - DPA: Pakistan considers Taliban rule in volatile valley
January 23, 2008 - Pakistan Dawn: Plan for Qazi courts -- Pakistan frontier govt draft regulation for a switchover to system of Sharia-based courts in Swat, Dir and Chitral districts
October 2, 2007 - Afghanistan's Taliban: US Tactics - Defeat or Negotiate? -- The Counterterrorism Blog - by Jeffrey Imm
October 1, 2007 - New Kerala - Is the 'War on Terror' in Afghanistan coming full circle?
FAS: Muslim Brothers, Muslim Brotherhood, al-Ikhwan al-Muslimin, Jama'at al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun, Hizb Al-Ikhwan Al-Muslimoon, al-Ikhwan ("The Brothers")
Muslim Brotherhood - Wikipedia
Muslim Brotherhood - Links to Violence
Muslim Brotherhood - Unequal rights for non-Muslims
Muslim Brotherhood - Holocaust denial
The Muslim Brotherhood Official English Website
March 26, 2007 - FrontPageMagazine.com: "Mainstreaming the Muslim Brotherhood" - Patrick Poole
January 25, 2008 - Reuters: Jordanians rally in support of Hamas in Gaza
September 10, 2007 - The Muslim Brotherhood in America Defined as "Threat Organization" in DOD Memo -- by Douglas Farah
August 2, 2007 - The Muslim Brotherhood’s "Military Work" in the US - The Investigative Project
August 1, 2007 - The Smoking Gun - Douglas Farah
Nine / Eleven Finding Answers (NEFA) - HLF Exhibit GX 3-85 -- "An Explanatory Memorandum: On the General Strategic Goal for the Group" - Mohamed Akram - May 22, 1991
Nine / Eleven Finding Answers (NEFA) - HLF Exhibit GX 24-29 - The Links between the U.S. and International Muslim Brotherhood
Winter 2005, Middle East Quarterly - "The Muslim Brotherhood's Conquest of Europe" - by Lorenzo Vidino
October 13, 2007 - Associated Press: Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood clashes with security forces on first day of Eid
Hizb ut-Tahrir - Wikipedia
August 27, 2007 - The Copenhagen Post: Islamic group incites war on West
July 8, 2007 - London Times: How I befriended a Glasgow bomb suspect and Islamic radical
December 25, 2007 - Washington Post: "The U.N. Insignia Emerges as a Global Target for Al-Qaeda Attacks"
July 31, 2001 - European Court of Human Rights - press release - Judgment in the case of Refah Partisi (The Welfare Party) Erbakan, Kazan, and Tekdal v. Turkey
January 22, 2004 - European Court of Human Rights -- Speeches by Mr. Luzius Wildhaber (President of the European Court of Human Rights) and Antonio Augusto Cancado Trindade (President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights)
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
December 21, 2007 - "Primacy of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights" - David Littman letter to Mrs. Louise Arbour, U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights
Muslims Against Sharia
November 13, 2007 - FrontPageMagazine.com - Muslims Against Sharia
February 1, 2008 - Family Security Matters: In War against Islamism, We Must Listen to the Words of Our Enemies by M. Zuhdi Jasser
October 2007, No. 29 - The Center for Security Policy - "Islamic Finance or Financing Islamism?" by Alex Alexiev
October 22, 2007 - "Bin Laden Sounds the Call of Defeat in Iraq (updated 10/23 with transcript)" - The Counterterrorism Blog - by Andrew Cochran
August 25, 2006 - The American Thinker: "Human Rights: Universal or Islamic?" - by David Littman
June 2, 2006 - International Humanist and Ethical Union: "Islam at the Human Rights Commission"
January 8, 2008 - UN E/CN.4/2003/NGO/4 - Islamist and Arab religious Anti-Semitism as a growing phenomenon; the protocols of the elders of Zion shown during Ramadan on Egyptian TV, statement by NGO Association for World Education
September 1999 - Middle East Quarterly: "Islamism Grows Stronger at the United Nations" - by David Littman
Tandem Project: History - United Nations, Human Rights, Freedom of Religion or Belief
United Nations - History -- Wikipedia
April 4, 2007 - The Economist: Bad counsel - The UN adrift on human rights
January 12, 2008 - "Islamism and Challenges to Resources for U.S. Strategic Planning Against Jihad" - The Counterterrorism Blog - by Jeffrey Imm
October 26, 2007 - "Jihad, Islamism, and the Challenge of Anti-Freedom Ideologies" - The Counterterrorism Blog - by Jeffrey Imm
October 12, 2007 - "The Dangerous Denial of Jihad's Threat" - The Counterterrorism Blog - by Jeffrey Imm
September 11, 2007 - 9/11 and the Inconvenient Truths about Jihad and Islamism - by Jeffrey Imm