When Will Authorities Reveal Hadi Matar's Collaborators, Demand Justice for Salman Rushdie (Videos)

One of the most celebrated and noticed writers of modern times, leftist Salman Rushdie, who for over 30 years lived under death threats from the Muslim world, was stabbed on Friday in Chautauqua, NY, while conducting a lecture on freedom of expression. The terrorist, a 24-year-old Muslim Hadi Matar, was overpowered and arrested after stabbing Rushdie 10 to 15 times in his neck, face, eye, arm, and abdomen.

Matar appeared in a court in New York state on Saturday wearing a prison jumpsuit and a face mask before entering his plea of not guilty.

A judge ordered him to be held without bail after district attorney Jason Schmidt said Matar took steps to harm Sir Salman purposely. “This was a targeted, unprovoked, pre-planned attack on Mr. Rushdie,” Mr. Schmidt said.

The prosecutor alluded to Iran’s fatwa, which the author of The Satanic Verses has been subjected to and hunted by Muslims for thirty-three years, to oppose the suspect’s release on bail. “Even if this court were to set a bond of $1 million, we run the risk that the sum could be collected,” he said.

“His own income does not matter to me. Instead, we see that the plan that was executed yesterday is something that has been vindicated by groups and organizations whose importance extends well beyond the jurisdictional boundaries of Chautauqua County,” the prosecutor added.

What the court failed to mention was Muslims are instructed in Quran 47:4 to “strike at the neck” of anyone who is, or has become, an unbeliever in Islam: “when you meet the unbelievers, strike their necks,”; which is precisely what Hadi Matar tried to do to the apostate Salman Rushdie on August 12, 2022, So there is nothing unusual or deviant in how Rushdie was treated in Islamic terms. In fact, being an apostate of Islam carries a death sentence all on its own. But Rushdie’s fatwa was for blasphemy. So Salman Rushdie was a triple threat.

Furthermore, Matar’s mother, Silvana, revealed how her outgoing, American-raised son took a month-long trip to the Middle East and returned a “religious zealot.”

Silvana, who is Lebanese and born Muslim, said she didn’t know if her son had ever read Rushdie’s book but detected he had become more religious during a 2018 trip to visit his father, adding that he would criticize her for not giving him a strict Muslim upbringing:

It was on a trip to Lebanon in 2018 to visit his father that Hadi changed from a popular, loving son to a moody introvert, according to Silvana….

Silvana also detected that her son was becoming more religious and he would criticize her for not giving him a strict Muslim upbringing….

‘One time he argued with me asking why I encouraged him to get an education instead of focusing on religion. He was angry that I did not introduce him to Islam from a young age,’ Silvana added.

‘I’m Lebanese but I’ve been here for 26 years. I’m living a simple life as a single mom, trying to keep a roof over our heads and food on the table for my kids.

‘I don’t care about politics, I’m not religious. I was born a Muslim and that’s it basically. I didn’t push my kids into religion or force anything on my son. I don’t know anyone in Iran, all my family are here.’…

As Robert Spencer points out, “so many times we have seen jihadis turn out to be people who were unreligious, and then at some point in their lives became much more involved with Islam, and then turned to jihad. Authorities, however, remain resolutely incurious about the possibility that Islamic teaching just might have something to do with this turn to violence.”

Islamic Attack

The Islamic attack occurred at the Chautauqua Institute, northwest New York City. Rushdie’s lecture, More than Shelter, intended to create a discussion about the United States as a home for creative freedom of expression and a country of asylum for writers and other artists in exile.

Rushdie was sitting on stage and was being introduced when a young man dressed in black approached, took out a knife, and stabbed him in the throat; eyewitness Julia Minerva-Braun told NBC News.

Mineeva-Braun says she initially thought the young man was a stagehand fixing Rushdie’s microphone because he was bending over him.

#SalmanRushdie just attacked onstage at @chq @NBCNews @ABC @cnnbrk pic.twitter.com/I1XT6AmkhK

— Charles Savenor (@CharlieSavenor) August 12, 2022

The crowd tackled the Muslim knifeman

The 75-year-old author is said to have received 10 to 15 stab wounds in quick succession but still managed to get up and run away from the Muslim attacker. The jihadi was tackled by members of the audience who rushed onto the stage before police arrested him.

The moment Salman Rushdie’s attacker was led off stage.#SalmanRushdie #Newyork pic.twitter.com/SEZDYswRWW

— Chaudhary Parvez (@ChaudharyParvez) August 12, 2022

Taken to hospital by helicopter

According to police, Henry Reese, the co-founder of the Pittsburgh nonprofit City of Asylum, was also attacked on stage and slightly injured. Witnesses state that Rushdie was conscious and able to communicate with those who gave him first aid. A doctor in the audience treated the author before he was taken by helicopter to a hospital, where he is now said to be undergoing surgery.

Salman Rushdie was taken to the hospital by medical helicopter.
Author Salman Rushdie was stabbed after taking stage at a Chautauqua Institute event.

This man has been detained by police.-#NYPD#SalmanRushdie #Newyork pic.twitter.com/M2xt3nicbh

— Chaudhary Parvez (@ChaudharyParvez) August 12, 2022

The Muslim knifeman sympathizes with the Iranian regime

The Muslim has been identified as 24-year-old Hadi Matar, a Fairview, New Jersey resident. Matar was born in the United States to Lebanese parents who emigrated from Yaroun, a border village in southern Lebanon, Mayor Ali Tehfe told the A.P. news agency.

According to NBC, he was born in California but had recently moved to New Jersey.  Matar also had a fake New Jersey driver’s license on him.  The fake I.D. had the name “Hassan Mughniyah,” a combination of the first name of Hezbollah’s leader and the last name of the Iran-backed Lebanese terror group’s former military chief:

It was initially reported that Hadi Matar showed sympathy toward the Iranian government. In addition, the suspect reportedly posted messages on social networks supporting the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC).

The IRGC is an Iranian military organization listed as a terrorist entity by the United States and several other countries. Its task is to secure Iran’s Muslim political system and to prevent foreign interference and coups by the military or “deviant movements.”

It was revealed that Matar had been in contact with Iran’s IRGC, a US-designated terrorist organization, before the nearly lethal assault on the writer.

VICE wrote that a Middle Eastern intelligence officU.S.l said it was “clU.S. before the stabbing that Matar had been in contact with “people either directly involved with or adjacent to the Quds Force,” the IRGC’s external militia. The U.S. has also classified the Quds Force as a foreign terrorist entity.

It was precisely the Iranian Ayatollah Rouhollah Khomeini who, in 1989 (the year of his death), pronounced the fatwa against Rushdie, calling on his sympathizers to assassinate the author of the “Satanic Verses,” who has since lived under police protection.

Iran denies ties to the attack

On Monday, an Iranian government official denied that it was involved in the attack on Rushdie. Meanwhile, they also blamed him for his own assault in the country’s first public comments on the attack.

Iran not only blamed Rushdie for the attack on himself but his supporters. Times of Israel of Isreal reports:

Nasser Kanaani, the spokesman of Iran’s Foreign Ministry, made the remarks in a briefing to journalists.

‘We categorically deny” any link with the attack, Kanaani said. “No one has the right to accuse the Islamic Republic of Iran.’

Speaking at his weekly press conference in Tehran, he added: “In this attack, we do not consider anyone other than Salman Rushdie and his supporters worthy of blame and even condemnation.

‘By insulting the sacred matters of Islam and crossing the red lines of more than one and a half billion Muslims and all followers of the divine religions, Salman Rushdie has exposed himself to the anger and rage of the people.’

In 2007, Salman Rushdie said that he still receives a “sort of Valentine’s card” from Iran each year on February 14, letting him know the country has not forgotten the vow to kill him. He was also quoted saying, “It’s reached the point where it’s a piece of rhetoric rather than a real threat

Lived with a Muslim death sentence for 30 years

Salman Rushdie was born in British India in 1947. He was knighted in Great Britain in 2007 and, since 2016, has been an American citizen. Rushdie has written 19 books but is perhaps best known for The Satanic Verses and the violent sick reaction of the Muslim world to its content, which they find blasphemous.

His second novel, Midnight’s Children won the Booker Prize in 1981 – it has since been deemed the “best winner of all time” on two occasions, marking the award’s 25th and 40th anniversaries.

However, he sparked controversy with his fourth novel, The Satanic Verses, published in 1988. The book’s title immediately sparked vehement protests against Rushdie’s book. The title refers to a legend of Islam’s Prophet Muhammad when a few verses were supposedly spoken by him as part of the Qur’an and then withdrawn because the devil had sent them to deceive Mohammad into thinking they came from God. 

Another controversial part of the novel, among many others, is that Rushdie uses a provocative name for Muhammed – Mahound, which was “an alternative name for Muhammed sometimes used during the Middle Ages by Christians who considered him a devil.”

The publication led, among other things, to Ayatollah Khomeini, Iran’s “spiritual leader” at the time, issuing a so-called “fatwa,” a decree based on Islamic law, which called on Muslims all over the world to kill the author and everyone who participated in the publication of the book.

“In the name of Allah … I am informing all brave Muslims of the world that the author of The Satanic Verses, a text written, edited, and published against Islam, the Prophet of Islam, and the Qu’ran, along with all the editors and publishers aware of its contents, are condemned to death. I call on all valiant Muslims wherever they may be in the world to kill them without delay so that no one will dare insult the sacred beliefs of Muslims henceforth. Whoever is killed in this cause will be a martyr, Allah willing. Meanwhile, if someone has access to the book’s author but is incapable of carrying out the execution, he should inform the people so that [Rushdie] is punished for his actions. May peace and blessings of Allah be upon you,” said Ayatollah Khomeini on Radio Tehran in 1989.

Khomeini’s condemnation had been reconfirmed in a 2019 tweet by Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, endorsing his predecessor’s murderous fatwa against author Salman Rushdie:

Imam Khomenei’s verdict regarding Salman Rushdie is based on divine verses and just like divine verses it is solid and irrevocable.”

As Robert Spencer at Jihad Watch reports:

Hadi was prompted by the letter and spirit of the late Ayatollah Khomeini, who 33 years ago had issued his famous fatwa against Rushdie, calling for his death because the writer had, in The Satanic Verses, been distinctly disrespectful of Muhammad. Tens of millions of Iranian Muslims, and many Lebanese Shi’a, were with Hadi Matar in spirit, delighted at his deed, and hailing him as a “hero” for his savagery. Much mafficking was observed throughout Muslim Iran, though as of this writing, the government in Tehran has refrained from public praise, saying only that it had no role in the attack. Many would disagree: the Iranian rulers’ original fatwa of 1988 and its confirmation in 2019 surely deeply implicate official Iran. Without that fatwa, Hadi Matar would never have taken it upon himself to try to kill Rushdie.

Hezbollah supporters, too, hailed the attack on social media, accompanying posts about it with the hashtag “holy stabbing.” They also lauded the assailant as a “hero.” In the mainstream media, the claims of both Iran and Hezbollah that they had “nothing to do” with the attack have been reported, but not the praise by Iranians and Hezbollah members on social media for Matar’s “heroism.”

Perceived violation leads to bombings and murders.

Publishers worldwide who printed or planned to publish The Satanic Verses in their native languages also received many death threats. In addition, the book was banned in several countries where Islam has significant influence. For example, several bookstores were subjected to bomb attacks in Great Britain. 

Hitoshi Igarashi, who translated the book into Japanese, was stabbed to death in his office at the University of Tsukuba, Japan, in 1991. The killing was said to have links to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, according to the author of the book The Persian Puzzle, former CIA analyst Kenneth Pollack. The murder came just days after the book’s Italian translator, Ettore Capriolo, was stabbed in his home in Milan.

Two years later, the book publisher William Nygaard, who published The Satanic Verses in Norway, was shot three times but survived. One of the suspects in the attack on Nygaard served as a diplomat at the Iranian embassy in Oslo, according to NRK.

There were many violent attacks across the West after the book’s release:

In the United States, FBI the was notified of 78 threats to bookstores in early March 1989, thought to be a small proportion of the total number of threats. B. Dalton bookstore chain received 30 threats in less than three hours. Bombings of book stores included two in Berkeley, California.

In New York, the office of a community newspaper, The Riversal Press was all but destroyed by firebombs following the publication of an editorial defending the right to read the novel and criticizing the bookstores that pulled it from their shelves. 

But the United Kingdom was the country where violence against bookstores occurred most often and persisted the longest. Two large bookstores in Charing Cross Road, London, (Collets and Dillions were bombed on 9 April.

In May, explosions went off in the town of High Wycombe and again in London, on Kinds Road. Other bombings included one at a large London department store (Libery’s), in connection with the Penguin Bookshop inside the store, and at the Penguin store in York. Unexploded devices were found at Penguin stores in Guildford, Nottingham, and Peterborough.

Across the Middle East, there were many protests. On February 12, 1989, a 10,000-strong protest against Rushdie and the book occurred in Islamabad, Pakistan. Six protesters were killed in an attack on the American Cultural Center, and an American Express office was ransacked

Muslims Celebrate Mata’s Jihad Attack on Rushdie

Muslim organizations and Iranian state media have previously offered over three million dollars in reward to whoever kills Rushdie. After the attack on social media, many Muslims, including mainstream Islamic figures, praised the knifeman, calling him ” lion ” and “ghazi,” an honorific title for Muslim warriors who fight non-Muslims.

Senior Correspondent at Dawn News, Ali Waqar hailed the assailant as a ‘young freedom fighter.’ He stated: “Freedom of hate, Freedom of torture, Freedom of disgrace is not freedom of speech.”

Within hours of Matar’s knife attack, Iranian media praised him. Kayhan, whose editor is appointed by Khamenei, declared, “A thousand bravos . . . to the brave and dutiful person who attacked the apostate and evil Salman Rushdie in New York.” It added, “The hand of the man who tore the neck of God’s enemy must be kissed.” Over a picture of Rushdie being rushed from Chautauqua on a stretcher, Khorasan, another conservative paper, headlined its front-page piece: “Satan on the path to Hell.”

The front page of Iran’s state-run newspaper Jam-e Jam celebrated the blinding of writer Salman Rushdie. The paper’s headline states, ‘Satan’s eye was blinded’:

Hadi Matar’s Other Collaborators

Quran

The brutal Muslim attack on Rushdie finds its justification in the Qur’an and Islamic tradition. “Whoever curses a Prophet, kill him. Whoever curses my Companions, beat him.” — Muhammad.

Under Sharia, those who insult Muhammad or Allah will be executed, as are those who desecrate the Quran or commit other acts of blasphemy. Furthermore, the Quran contains at least 109 verses that speak of war with nonbelievers, usually based on their status as non-Muslims. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called ‘hypocrites’ and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter. These violent verses of the Quran seemed to have incited the horrific attack on Rushdie.

American Singer Cat Steven aka Yusuf Islam

On February 21, 1989, Cat Stevens, alias Yusuf Islam following his religious conversion, publicly expressed himself in favor of the death penalty targeting Salman Rushdie.

Stevens addressed students at Kingston Polytechnic (now Kingston University) in London about his conversion to Islam and was asked about the controversy in the Muslim world and the fatwa calling for Salman Rushdie’s execution. He replied, “He must be killed. The Qur’an makes it clear – if someone defames the prophet, then he must die.”

Two months later, Islam appeared on an Australian television program, ABC’s Geoffrey Robertson’s Hypotheticals, expressing his hopes that Rushdie would be killed.

Robertson: You don’t think that this man deserves to die?
Y. Islam: Who, Salman Rushdie?
Robertson: Yes.
Y. Islam: Yes, yes.
Robertson: And do you have a duty to be his executioner?
Y. Islam: Uh, no, not necessarily, unless we were in an Islamic state and I was ordered by a judge or by the authority to carry out such an act – perhaps, yes.
[Some minutes later, Robertson on the subject of a protest where an effigy of the author is to be burned]
Robertson: Would you be part of that protest, Yusuf Islam, would you go to a demonstration where you knew that an effigy was going to be burned?
Y. Islam: I would have hoped that it’d be the real thing.

British Baroness Emma Nicholson

Baroness Nicholson’s defense of the Iranian regime first became apparent after Ayatollah Khomeini’s fatwa and the Iranian government’s offer of a $2 million bounty to anyone who would murder Salman Rushdie for his fourth novel, The Satanic Verses. At the time, Nicholson said Rushdie’s “blasphemy” — not Iran’s order to murder him — was “intolerable.”

As Gatestone Insitute reported, Nicholson also urged the British government — despite Iran’s call to murder Rushdie — to maintain links with the Iranian regime to bolster the “balance of sanity” in the region and provide continued opposition to Saddam Hussein.

Addressing the House of Lords in 1998, Nicholson again referred to the “Rushdie problem” and claimed that his blasphemy had led to hostility between the West and the Tehran regime: “We should do all possible to resolve the bilateral problems that have been put on our plate by blasphemy. We should remember how important blasphemy is to real worshippers of whatever faith. We should try to overcome an issue that has gone well past its sell-by date — the Rushdie problem.”

Dr. Ataollah Mohajerani

Dr. Ataollah Mohajerani was Iran’s former Minister of Culture and Islamic Guidance. Mohajerani is best known for his book-length defense of Ayatollah Khomeini’s fatwa against the British novelist Salman Rushdie. After Khomeini’s call on the world’s Muslims to kill Rushdie for writing a novel, Mohajerani wrote a 250-page book, A Critique of the Conspiracy of The Satanic Verses, which justified the death sentence.

For more than a decade, however, apparently fallen out with part of the regime in Iran, Mohajerani has been living in Harrow, England, where he intermittently keeps up his campaign against Rushdie. The Islamic supremacist was granted citizenship in 2009 despite his threats toward Rushdie. f

Publishers, Media, and Politicians Who Did Not Speak Out

How different the world would be if every publisher in 1989 had published some portion of The Satanic Verses on their front pages. How different if politicians and diplomats in the West had used their voices and platform to condemn the Ayatollah? Instead, they remained silent or criticized Rushdie to protect themselves.

Christian Bourgois, a French publishing house that had bought the rights, refused to publish The Satanic Verses. It was the first time that, in the name of Islam, a writer was condemned to disappear from the face of the earth — to be murdered for a bounty.

“The more of us who choose to stay silent, the more dangerous it becomes for the few who continue speaking out,” expressed a Charlie Hebdo journalist. The fact is that where critical thinking & free speech end, the West also ends.

Muslim supremacists and the Left have put the free world on notice: if you insult Muhammad, Islam, their holy books, or even fail to consider Islamic law (Sharia) in all things, we will harm you.

It is also not surprising that so many are afraid of mentioning the word ‘Islam”. People are concerned about the consequences of making Muslims angry. As we have seen repeatedly throughout the Islamic world and now the Western world, being critical of Islam means death threats or actual attempts on your life. We have witnessed cartoonists, comedians, teachers, preachers, children, and anyone who publicly defies Islam as it insists on being represented across the world.

On the other hand, many left-wing politicians and groups will not condemn Islam due to their dangerous and historic strategic alliances known as the Red/Green Axis:

Communists and Islamic Supremacists have a long history of uniting to destroy their common enemy: those who believe in sovereignty and individual freedom.” To achieve their own goals, they use one another until their goals are achieved, and only at that time will they “turn on one another and, in the end, fight to destroy the other.

The goal of the Left and Islam is to force the world’s people to submit to their ideology. “Submission” is the proper translation of the word “Islam.” Submission will be accomplished through force or by voluntary conversion.

Leftist activists, politicians, and organizations assist this jihad on non-muslims and free speech by calling all who openly criticize Islam of being guilty of “hate speech.” This secular equivalent of “blasphemy” is rapidly working into Western law.

Countries that Banned the Book

The book was banned in India shortly after it was published in 1988 for hurting the feelings of Muslims.

In November 1988, it was also banned in Bangladesh, Sudan, and South Africa. By December 1988, it was also banned in Sri Lanka. Finally, in March 1989, it was also banned in Malaysia.

In March 1989, it was banned in Kenya, Thailand, Tanzania, Indonesia, and Singapore. The last nation to ban the book was Venezuela in June 1989.

In the United States, it was unavailable in about one-third of bookstores. In many others that carried the book, it was kept under the counter.

Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter

Former United States president Jimmy Carter, while condemning the threats and fatwa against Rushdie, he also blamed the author:

we have tended to promote him and his book with little acknowledgment that it is a direct insult to those millions of Moslems whose sacred beliefs have been violated and are suffering in restrained silence the added embarrassment of the Ayatollah’s irresponsibility.

He also held that Rushdie must have been aware of the response his book would evoke: “The author, a well-versed analyst of Muslim beliefs, must have anticipated a horrified reaction throughout the Islamic world.” He saw a need to be “sensitive to the concern and anger” of Muslims and thought severing diplomatic relations with Iran would be an “overreaction.”

Western Religious Groups

Many religious figures in the United States and the United Kingdom did not stand with Rushdie but instead condemned him, daring to upset Muslim’s feelings.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Robert Runcie, demanded that the government expand the Blasphemy Act to cover other religions, including Islam.

Some rabbis, such as Immanuel Jakobovits, chief rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth, opposed the book’s publication.

Pakistani Film

While it is well known that Iran’s first Supreme Leader called upon all Muslims to kill Salman Rushdie, Pakistanis enacted it out in a bizarre film named ‘International Gorillay.’

The contentious movie, released in 1990, featured actor Afzaal Ahmad in the role of Salman Rushdie. The novelist’s character has been portrayed as a criminal mastermind, leading an international conspiracy to destroy Islam, reports OpIndia.

As expected, Rushdie was shown to have the support of the ‘U.K.hudi (Jewish)’ Israeli aU.K.y. The story highlighted the characters of three ‘Muslim’ brothers who decide to go to the Philippines, where Rushdie had been hiding with his Israeli henchmen.

The film showed that the three men were shocked at the publication of ‘The Satanic Verses and wanted to restore ‘world peace’ by killing Salman Rushdie. A video clip from the film is now doing the rounds of the internet.

While the Pakistani movie International Gorillay was banned in the UK because it constituted criminal libel against Salman Rushdie, the ban was lifted after free-speech advocate Rushdie appealed against it.

West Submits to Islam

We have caved into Islam, and Western appeasers reports, Italian journalist Giulio Meotti. “It is the tragic lesson of the Rushdie case 30 years later: no author would dare to write The Satanic Verses today; no large publishing house would print it; media attacks against “Islamophobes” would be even stronger, as would the bottomless betrayal of Western diplomats. Also, today, thanks to social media as a weapon of censorship and implicit mass threats, any author would probably be less fortunate than Rushdie was 30 years ago. Yet, since that time, we have made no progress. Instead, we have been seeing the jihad against The Satanic Verses over and over again.”

Muslim Nations Fight To Criminalize Speech

Pakistani leader Imran Khan threatened that “there will come a time when people in the Western countries will think twice before disrespecting the Holy Prophet (PBUH).” Any comment perceived as “disrespectful” against Islam in Pakistan means life in prison or a death sentence.

The suppression of speech in the wake of the Rushdie attack is part of an ongoing initiative by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to implement blasphemy laws worldwide.

The OIC is an influential bloc of 57 Muslim countries within the United Nations and represents the second largest international organization in the world after the UN itself. Its primary objective is to pressure Europe and the United States into passing laws that would ban “negative stereotyping of Islam.” The OIC is headquartered in Saudi Arabia and funded by Islamic countries worldwide. It is the second-largest intergovernmental organization in the world after the United Nations, with a collective population reaching over 1.8 billion. Pakistan holds a very privileged status in the OIC; it is the OIC’s second-largest member in terms of population. 

The European Union and the United States Democratic Party have worked closely with the OIC and UN to ouU.N.aw all forms of “Islamophobia.” The term Islamophobia was invented in the 1990s by a Muslim Brotherhood front group to help export blasphemy laws to the West. Similarly, “Hate speech” is the Marxist version of Islamic blasphemy laws.  Each intends to silence any speech which may question the state ideology.

The “Islamophobia” and “hate speech” scams are insidious because they shut down the most important of American values, freedom of speech. 

Blasphemy Laws Introduced To America and the EU

In recent years, one of the core activities of the OIC has been repeated attempts to introduce via the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) a law U.N.ferred to as Resolution 16/18, forbidding any blasphemy, criticism, or negative comment about the Islamic religion.

Resolution 16/18 was co-sponsored by the United States, along with Pakistan. During a series of closed-door meetings over at least three years, it was spearheaded by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Following the Obama Administration’s lead, the European Union offered to help the OIC make it an international crime to criticize Islam.

In America in 2016, Eighty-two Democrats cosponsored a House Resolution (H.Res. 569) “Condemning violence, bigotry, and hateful rhetoric towards Muslims in the United States.” This resolution is very eerily similar to the UN Human Rights Commission’s Resolution 16/18.

The OIC has used its influence in Brussels to enact “hate speech” legislation to limit what European citizens can say. Restrictions on free speech regarding Islam-related issues are already commonplace throughout Europe. (see here, here, here, and here). In addition, the OIC aims to impose blasphemy legislation on the European Union’s 27 member states.

Free Speech

The attempt to enact special legislation to protect Islam in Western and secular nations is a joint Islamic and Marxist effort to stop any form of dissenting expression. Dissenting expression is typically any attempt to defend Western and especially American culture, values, and identity.

Should “Democratic” countries allow special rights for one group and not others? Islam, perhaps above all, embodies little tolerance for other religions – or even lack of religion. So affording Islam – or anyone – special rights is the death knell for a society based on equal rights.

Both Islamic law (Sharia) and Marxist thought are not just incompatible with Western culture but explicitly designed to be a destructive force to the Judeo-Christian values historically associated with the West.

Islamic countries, Muslim organizations, and Islamic supremacists’ protests in response to Rushdie’s book The Satanic Versus and other perceived insults are part of an orchestrated plan specifically tailored to dismantle free expression and usher in Islamic law.