14 Jul


Dhimmis – DHIMMI :: Coalition for the Defense of Human Rights Institutionalized apartheid. In Shari’a law, there are official discriminations against the Dhimmi, such as the poll-tax or jizya. No legal rights.

Petition to the United Nations Against Religious Apartheid …The Coalition for the Defense of Human Rights is an umbrella coalition representing various organizations from the following communities: Arab-Christian, Armenian, Assyrian, Bahai, Buddhist, Copt, Hindu, Humanist Muslim, Ibo, Maronite, Nubian, secular intellectuals, Southern Filipino, Slavic-Christian, Southern Sudanese, Syriac, West African, and women’s groups.

We gather to demonstrate our determination to protest the treatment of religious and ethnic minorities, as well as women and moderate and secularized Muslims in Islamic lands. We are here also to cry out against the murderous ideology of radical Islamism, which, by dividing humankind into worthy Muslims and inferior “infidels” is wreaking havoc throughout the world.

In the face of growing attacks and oppression of religious and ethnic minorities in Islamic lands, we respectfully make the following two demands upon the appropriate organs of the United Nations:

1. We call upon you today to appoint a Special Rapporteur to investigate the status and conditions of non-Muslim minorities, women, and humanist, moderate Muslims in states ruled by Islamic majorities. Such a rappoteur must investigate the following conditions.

Equality Under Law: What is the status, both in law and in practice, of these groups, and of individuals belonging to these groups? Do the laws in these nations discriminate against religious minorities? Do members of these groups have the same rights to assemble, speak, publish, and associate as those in the majority? Can members of these classes be elected to governmental and representative bodies? Is there a government policy of discriminating against the hiring of members of these classes? Does the government allow or encourage radical anti-minority organizations to abuse, threaten or otherwise oppress minority populations? Do the agencies that enforce the laws represent all groups in society?

Religious rights and freedom: Do members of minority faiths have the right to practice their faiths freely? Do they have the right to proselytize? Do members of the majority faith have the right to choose another faith?

Cultural equality: Are the rights and cultures of national, religious, and ethnic minorities respected?

Teaching of hatred and contempt: What is the view of these classes promoted by the government and the general culture?

2. We call upon the United Nations to condemn the ideology of Jihad-Islamism as a form of religious apartheid, which divides humankind into exalted Muslims and inferior “infidels.”

Radical Jihad-Islamism is a supremacist, quasi-racist ideology that is now waging terrorist war worldwide against innocent men, women and children it labels “infidels.” This ideology is supporting religious wars against non-Islamist Muslims and non-Muslim infidels worldwide. It is seeking to establish Apartheid-like regimes similar to those in Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Sudan, to subjugate and control “infidels.” It legitimizes and extends human rights abuses – including slavery – on a massive scale. It employs a global economic resource (oil) as a weapon against non-Muslim nations in the service of its goals. It is the duty of the United Nations, which came into being as a result of racist Nazism, to condemn and to combat any ideology which defines some part of the human race as inferior.

Radical Jihad-Islamism must be condemned as a form of cultural, racial, religious and ethnic discrimination, and the United Nations should equate it with Colonialism and Imperialism. It should condemn its teaching to any community or school and it should call for a “corrective teaching” to seek to undo the hatred that it has engendered in peoples who have been taught the ideology. Further, the U.N. should condemn all current Jihad wars and call on nations waging such wars to cease violating the rights of ethnic and religious minorities and peoples. Finally, the U.N. should intervene to protect the rights and lives of religious and ethnic minorities and non-Islamist Muslims in Afghanistan, Algeria, Egypt, Indonesia, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Mauritania, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia Sudan, and Syria…

A Clash of Values: The Struggle for Universal Freedom – Page 15
Tal Ben-Shahar – 2002 – 160 pages

The spirit of dhimmitude is pervasive in the Muslim world, regardless of how religious a country is. Even the more secular Muslim countries, such as Egypt and Jordan, discriminate against non-Muslims. There are exceptions, Turkey being one of them, but even in those places Islamic fundamentalism is gaining support. Dhimmitude is institutionalized apartheid in its most blatant form, part of the official law in the dar al-Islam..

FLAME Hotline: Muslim Apartheid Targets Christians as well as Jews …Jan 11, 2011 … Muslim Apartheid Targets Christians as well as Jews in the Middle East.

Islam’s Apartheid

Amil Imani

[May 19, 2011]

The dictionary defines apartheid as: An official policy of racial segregation promulgated in the Republic of South Africa with a view to promoting and maintaining white ascendancy.

In 1973, the General Assembly of the United Nations opened for signature and ratification the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (ICSPCA). It defined the crime of apartheid as:

"Inhuman acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial [religious] group of persons over any other racial [religious] group of persons and systematically oppressing them."[Italics are mine]
The declaration prohibits,
“Acts such as murder, infringement on freedom or dignity, arbitrary arrest and imprisonment, imposition of inhumane living conditions, forced labor, or enacting measures calculated to prevent a racial [religious] group from ‘participation in the political, social, economic and cultural life of the country’ such as denying them ‘basic human rights and freedoms, including the right to work, the right to form recognized trade unions, the right to education, the right to leave and to return to their country, the right to a nationality, the right to freedom of movement and residence, the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.’"
Islamic member countries of the time, such as Egypt, Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia are signatories to the above declaration condemning the barbaric practices of apartheid. Yet, these same countries, as well as other Islamic nations, are the most blatant violators of the declaration.

It is the discriminatory Islamic teachings that condone and even promote wanton practices in violation of the United Nations declaration. Islam is a primitive barbaric ideology for the benefit of the male believer.

Islam, by fiat, discriminates against women. Qur’an 4:11

“Allah directs you in regard of your Children’s (inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females…. These are settled portions ordained by Allah.”
There are many many more “directives” that for all intents and purposes make women chattel of men. Here are some of the shameful rules and practices of Islamic misogyny.
Tabari IX:113 “Allah permits you to shut them in separate rooms and to beat them, but not severely. If they abstain, they have the right to food and clothing. Treat women well for they are like domestic animals and they possess nothing themselves. Allah has made the enjoyment of their bodies lawful in his Qur’an.”

Tabari I:280 “Allah said, ‘It is My obligation to make Eve bleed once every month as she made this tree bleed. I must also make Eve stupid, although I created her intelligent.’ Because Allah afflicted Eve, all of the women of this world menstruate and are stupid.”

In this case Allah is half right. Women do menstruate. But He is also wrong. Extensive studies by impartial psychologists provide unequivocal documentation of the fact that women are equal in intelligence to men.

But don’t contradict Allah and his beloved unerring mouthpiece, Muhammad. Sadly enough, even many Muslim women prefer to be treated like “domestic animals” who “possess nothing themselves,” and are “stupid.”

Thus, life goes on for the Muslim women with all the trappings of the Islamic misogyny. Here are some rules that keep women in their Muhammad-stipulated place.

·         If a Muslim woman is murdered, her beneficiary is entitled to one-half dyyeh—blood money, or compensation—as that of a murdered Muslim male.
·         A woman’s testimony in the court of law is worth one-half that of a man.
·         A woman must provide four witnesses to substantiate her claim of being raped.
·         A man can divorce his wife by simply saying to her, “I divorce you,” three times.
·         A divorced woman is entitled to a miserly compensation and automatically forfeits her rights to her children.
·         Women are barred from the lucrative and powerful cast of clergy.
·         Husbands are entitled to punish their wives corporally.
·         Men are allowed to have four wives at any one time and as many concubines as they desire and can afford.
·         Saudi Arabia, the custodian of “true Islam” imposes a raft of restrictions on women such as: women are not allowed to drive; they are not permitted to leave the country without accompaniment or explicit permission of their male kin; they are barred from most government jobs and much much more.
·         Among other Muslims, such as the Taliban and the Pashtune of Afghanistan-Pakistan region, women are barred from education and not even allowed to leave the house unless accompanied by a male kin.
·         Since education, particularly professional education, is often denied to women in many Islamic societies, there is scarcity of women physicians and male doctors are often forbidden to treat women patients.
Such is the plight of women under Islam. There is hardly the need to provide an exhaustive list of Islamic misogyny to qualify it as a shameful, discriminatory and oppressive religious apartheid.

Will Muslim women ever break out of their bondage and claim their rightful place among emancipated non-Muslim women? It is the long sub-humanized Muslim women who must discard Islam and claim their equal human rights. Muslim men will resort to every means to maintain their privileged position and their cruel dominance over women, citing the Quran as justification. Any document that consigns one half of the human race to second class status is null and void.

Its constitutional sub-humanization of women aside, Islam has a raft of beliefs and practices that violate fundamental human rights of non-Muslims in general. A few cases should suffice to fully substantiate the contention that Islam is religious apartheid. And there is no need to draw cases from the repugnant “extremist” Islamic groups such as the Taliban to make the case. Even the most “mainstream” and “peaceful” Islam is guilty of systemic apartheid. Just a couple of examples should suffice for now.

·         On December 16, 2006, Egypt’s Highest Administrative Court decreed that in order to receive an Identity Card, only Islam, Judaism, or Christianity must be entered on the application. No one of any other religion or no religion at all is permitted to list his belief or even leave it blank. Without the identity card, just about all the rights of citizenship are denied to minorities such as Baha’is, Hindus, and Buddhists. People are forced to choose between falsely claiming an approved religion and depriving themselves of just about all rights of citizenship such as jobs, education and medical care.
·         In the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Islamic law denies dyyeh to any and all people who are not Muslims or members of the only other three recognized religions. Every one of the 500,000 members of the Baha’i Faith can be murdered without the family receiving justice or compensation. As a matter of fact, the Islamic government itself has executed Baha’is for the sole “crime” of being Baha’is and has demanded that the innocently murdered person’s family reimburse it for the bullets they used to execute him.
·         The Islamic Republic of Iran’s President’s repeated threat to wipe out Israel from the map is ignored by some as an empty rhetoric of an unhinged fanatic. Yet, Ahmadinejad’s threats are far from the baseless saber-rattling of a zealot. Ahamadinejad’s government has recently ordered the comprehensive gathering of data regarding the Baha’is and all their activities. This order is deeply troubling, since it is almost a replica of what another fascist, Hitler, did before launching the genocide of six million Jews and some four million other “undesirables”. Ahamadinejad is an Islamofascist whose aim is to have a practice run on the Iranian Baha’is before embarking on destroying the Jews and other “undesirables,” following in the footsteps of the German fuehrer.
Islamic societies shamelessly practice all the sanctioned injustices listed in the U.N. charter on apartheid (see paragraphs 2 and 3, above). Islam is religious apartheid. And apartheid, by universal agreement, is an inhumane, unjust and condemned practice.

Islam cruelly practices its oppressive dogma on minorities in its lands; it is in clear violation of the provisions of Universal Human Rights. Ominously, Islam is encroaching in the traditionally non-Islamic parts of the world and doing all it can to impose its horrid doctrine on others.

It is for this present and imminent danger that the free people of the world must rise and do all they can to preserve their birthright of liberty. Muslims in the non-Islamic lands may seem harmless, and many of them indeed are harmless. Yet, Islam compels its leaders to uphold and promote its tenets at any and all costs to anyone. It is for this reason that on the one hand the Islamic governments sign the U.N. Charter that condemns apartheid, and on the other hand, these governments violate every provision of it when they are in power.

Islamofascism, the enemy of liberty, is inside the gate. It is the duty of every free human to defend freedom by defeating the enemy.

The Brownshirts of Our Time – Phyllis Chesler
The largest practitioner of apartheid in the world is Islam, which practices both gender and religious apartheid. In terms of gender apartheid, Palestinian women – and all women who live under Islam – are oppressed by “honor” killings, forced veiling, segregation, stonings to death for alleged adultery, seclusion/sequestration, female genital mutilation, polygamy, outright slavery, and sexual slavery. Women have few civil, legal, or human rights under Islam. Today, the entire Middle East is judenrein. Jews cannot become citizens of Jordan, Egypt, or Saudi Arabia, yet no one accuses those nations of apartheid.

Rebranding Apartheid

Published: Friday, January 20, 2012 4:23 PM
Sharia law is the real apartheid. Let’s tell the world the truth about Arab rights in Israel and Arab rights in Islamic countries.

Ron Jager

The Arab Spring and the Islamic takeover of the Middle East provides Israel and her supporters the opportunity to rebrand the current media narrative concerning Apartheid. As usual, Israel’s public diplomacy consistently misses the opportunity to expose the hypocrisy of our Arab neighbors. It is an outright lie to claim or to imply that Israel is an apartheid state, yet it is done all the time repeatedly by the Holocaust denier Mahmoud Abbas and other Arab leaders, and by his supporters in the United States and Europe.

This distortion of the truth has been extremely effective in the war of words and has fallen on receptive ears in the international arena, in the media & internet, and on college campuses.

As the Arab spring becomes an Islamic tsunami wiping out any semblance of democratic or human rights for the Arab masses, as the leader of Syria, Bashir Assad butchers over 6000 of his own countrymen, now is the time to rebrand the meaning of Apartheid. Now is the time to remind the world that Israel is the only Democracy in the Middle East and that the Arabs living in Israel including Judea and Samaria enjoy more Democratic rights than any Arab living in any Middle Eastern Islamic nation.

According to the 1998 Rome Statute, Apartheid is defined as “Inhumane acts … committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.” Islamic Sharia law is the prevalent system of law today among the Islamic nations embodying racism by adopting laws of institutionalized discrimination and “legal” racism against anyone who is not a Muslim.  This is the authentic narrative of Apartheid today imploring us to rebrand Apartheid. Associating Israel with Apartheid seems more absurd than ever when compared to the violation of human rights in Islamic ruled nations.

Factually speaking, apartheid was the official policy of the South African government that established and maintained racial segregation and racial discrimination against non-whites, and abolished in 1992. The South African non-whites could not vote, and they had to carry a “Pass Book,” or they risked being jailed or deported. In addition, non-white South Africans were kept from a wide range of jobs.  

They had no free elementary through high school education; mixed sexual relationships were restricted and segregated; hospital and ambulance services were segregated; they could not use most public amenities; sports were segregated; and public facilities were labeled for correct racial usage.  Non-whites could not enter a building through the main entrance, be a member of a union, or participate in a strike. 

By contrast, all citizens of Israel have equal voting rights.  Arabs have eleven representatives in Israel’s Knesset, including an Arab on the Israeli Supreme Court and a full range of other civil and political rights. Arabs in Israel receive equal access and are subject to equal treatment in hospitals.  There are no “anti-miscegenation” laws, or other policies of racial segregation.

As we begin the arduous journey of rebranding Apartheid, let’s begin by pointing out the similarities between Sharia Law and Islamic gender apartheid.

What is amazing is that whether in isolated enclaves in the heart of European cities or the major cities of Canada, or in the Islamic nations of the Middle East, gender Apartheid is an accepted norm in Islamic societies. Forced marriages for 13 year old girls, honor killings, domestic slavery, rape and torture of women until they convert to Islam, stoning women accused of adultery to death, and female genital mutilation are all only a few of the many examples that are condoned by Islamic gender apartheid.

Speaking out against these kinds of Islamic norms as in the case of the Dutch director Theo Van Gogh who was murdered on the streets of Amsterdam by an Islamic terrorist for exposing the abuse of women, all in the name of Islam is what awaits many that publicly expose Islamic Apartheid.

The following are some common laws of Islamic Sharia law which are regularly practiced and can be easily associated with Apartheid;

·        A Muslim who leaves Islam (apostate) must be killed immediately

·        A Muslim will be forgiven for murder of : a) an apostasy b) an adultere

·        A Muslim will not get the death penalty if he kills a non-Muslim

·        Sharia dictates death by stoning, beheading, for sins like killing, adultery, prostitutions; and other Quranic corporal punishments like: amputation of limbs (chopping hands and feet), floggings, beatings and other forms of cruel and unusual punishments even for the sins like: stealing, sexual promiscuity, robbery, burglary etc

·        Non-Muslims are not equal to Muslims and must comply to Sharia

·        Divorce is only in the hands of the husband and is as easy as saying: “I divorce you”

·        Homosexuality is punishable by death

·        The testimony of a woman in court is half the value of a man; that is, two women equal to one man

·        A woman loses custody of her children if she remarries

Falsly branding Israel as an Apartheid state means something more fundamental:  that there is no justification for there being a Jewish state at all, based on hatred and contempt for Jews.

By rebranding Apartheid and associating it with the absense of basic human rights and freedom in the Islamic nations of the Middle East, we can transform the accepted narrative to its rightful place.

Israel Anti Terrorism Jerusalem Summit Meets German Christian Zionists On Islamic Apartheid.

By Herb Brandon
Israel News Agency – May 20, 2008


The Jerusalem Summit is an international conservative think-tank whose objective is developing an effective and Bible-value-based strategy for fighting the terrorism of radical Islam. The Jerusalem Summit advocates diplomatic and economic sanctions against countries practicing gender and faith apartheid. Major examples of Islamic apartheid can be witnessed in depriving women and religious minorities of equal rights.

Israel: And the Palestinian Nightmare – Page 158 – Ze’ev Shemer – 2010 – 244 pages
…Because we live at a time when objective truth does not matter anymore, when only Big Lies matter. For example, Islam is the world’s largest practitioner of both religious and gender apartheid. Say this on most campuses, as I have, and you will be jeered, booed, possibly physically menaced, certain demonized afterwards as a “racist” and “Islamophobe.”

Suissa: Murdering Israel’s Name

Mar 27, 2011 – Here’s my candidate: “Israel is the ONLY country in the Middle East that is NOT apartheid.”

From Salman Rushdie to WTC

The crimes against humanity of supporters of Islamic Apartheid and their attacks on progress and human rights has not started with their brutal terrorist attack on World Trade Center in New York. It has been going on for a long time and the West had heard it loud and clear the first time, with the fatwa of Ayatollah Khomeini to kill the author Salman Rushdie because of Salman Rushdie’s ideas opposing Islam. Islamic Apartheid has been trying to lynch Salman Rushdie for over a decade . Even though Iranian government distanced itself from the fatwa, but the terrorists in Iran openly collected bounty money to kill Salman Rushdie.

The Islamic Apartheid has slaughtered many of their opponents such as Shahpour Bakhtiar, in cold blood, in Paris, while basically the West stayed silent and did not want take any drastic action, risking a change in the status quo of the Middle East, where only the safe flow of oil from that region, is all that the Western states cared for. The atrocities of another state of Islamic Apartheid, the Islamic Fundamentalist regime of Taleban in Afghanestan, has been known for a long time. For example see the following website about their crimes against humanity:

The atrocities of Islamic Apartheid has been around long before they took power in Iran in 1979 Revolution. The fatwa to kill Ahmad Kasravi, by the mullahs in 1950’s was the best example of their resorting to murder to silence their opponents, the opponents who called for progressive society in the Middle East. Ahmad Kasravi, progressive author in Iran, not having much security, before Islamic Republic, was easily murdered by the Islamic Apartheid terrorists. Elsewhere in the Middle East, the Islamic Apartheid is not particular to Iran. The main supporter of the U.S. government in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia, is a fundamentalist Islamic state, which openly discriminates against followers of other religions, such as the Jews, and justifies the stone-age Islamic punishments of beheading and stoning and discriminates against women . In fact, many of these countries have religious authorities, who supported the murder fatwa against Salman Rushdie, but one seldom hears about it, because they are supporters of the U.S.

Regardless of what various governments do in response to the WTC bombing, I think one thing is certain that the Islamic Apartheid lost its legitimacy with the heinous atrocity of World Trade Center in New York. Islamic fanatics cannot pretend as victims anymore. The victim game that the Islamic Republic and its agents had played for so long, while committing the crimes against humanity, will not work anymore, to get the support of some pseudo-intellectuals in the West. Their terrors against the dissidents such as Bakhtiar and Ghasemloo in the West, cannot be written off, as actions against imperialism anymore.

Iranian government allowing terrorists to freely collect money and plan for the murder of Salman Rushdie cannot be acceptable anymore. When committing stoning of a porn movie star in Iran or killing Foruhars and writers for their ideas inside Iran, one would ask about what Islamic Apartheid is doing to humanity. Yes, their gesturing of defending themselves against the imperialists, and showing themselves as victims, does not cut it anymore. The bombing of WTC by supporters of Islamic Apartheid was equivalent to the burning of Jews in concentration camps by the Fascists, when after the publicity of their atrocities, they lost their legitimacy, and could no longer justify their murderous ideology, with the cloak of combating decadence.

Finally it is very sad that the Middle Eastern people are being attacked as Islamic fanatics in the West. In fact, the majority of the people of Middle East, both in countries like Iran, Afghanestan, and other Middle Eastern countries, and Middle Easterners abroad, are the ones who have opposed the Islamic Apartheid more than all the Western people and states, and they have given many martyrs in their challenge of Islamic Apartheid. Among them, dissidents like Dr. Shahpour Bakhtiar in Paris and Foruhars in Tehran. The reality is that the real force of retrogression in the Middle East is Islamic Apartheid, whether in the form of retrogressive Islamic ideologies of Islamic fanatics in Iran, or the Islamic Fundamentalism of Taleban and Saudi Arabia, and it should be challenged by all progressive-minded people all over the world.

Rants about Islamic extremists and cruel policies in Arab states are valid … East — a region where Islamic apartheid is the actual order of the day. iticism

Christians in the Middle East Christian Arab existence in Jerusalem is being threatened because its Arab population … Islam operates a system of racial and religious apartheid




The collective intolerant Islamic apartheid systems one by one.

All minorities suffer from harsh discrimination in all Arab/Islamic societies, not to mention the wide ethnic cleansing of a Million Jewish refugees.
Among regimes accused of ‘apartheid’ are:

Iran [Ethnic racist apartheid against: Kurds, Arabs, Baluchis, Turkmen etc. Religious apartheid: against all other faiths: Christians, Zoroastrians, Bahai’, Jews, etc.].

Sudan [Arab racist supremacist genocide and oppression motivated by racism against non-Arab natives. The Arab ruler al-Bashir is accused of genocide. There’s also a Sharia strict Islamic rule against non-Muslims].

Mauritania [against non-Arab natives].

Arab-Palestine, Palestinian Authority [against Christians, Jews (such as, a ‘Jew-free’ policy, with a racist law punishable by death of anyone selling land to Jews), Ahmadis, blacks].

Jordan [against Christians, Arab-Palestinians, non-Bedouin Arabs, Jews (in fact, already in 1948, it instituted a real ‘legal’ religious apartheid system in its occupied Jerusalem, which was abolished when Israel liberated it in 1967), Gypsies].

Syria [against the majority who is not Alawi… Still, Kurds are among the non-Arab groups who suffer probably the most of Arab racism.

Kuwait / UAE [against Asians, Blacks].

Saudi Arabia [against Asians, Jews, Christians, Blacks].

Bahrain / Saudi Arabia [anti-Shia apartheid].

Egypt [against Christian Copts – the pre-Arab invasion indigenous people, and against blacks].

Iraq [still, post Saddam’s era, anti-Black discriminations, anti-Assyrian and anti-Kurd].

Lebanon [anti-Blacks, anti Arab-Palestinian and deep Muslim Christian divide].

Libya [anti-black racism, oppression].

Turkey [against (Christians as a whole) Greeks (plus the apartheid on Cyprus), Armenians, Kurds].

Yemen [against indigenous al-Akhdam].

Morocco / Tunisia / Algeria [against Berbers – indigenous people, before the Arab invasion].

Malaysia [racial superiority against non-Malaysians].

Indonesia [non-Muslims, especially Chinese, Christians, also long bloody history on ‘others,’ in Papua and in E. Timor].

Pakistan [non-Muslims in general, especially Indians, incuding certain election laws desinged to block non-Muslims].


Worth mentioning that while Christians dwindle all over intolerant Middle East, they flourish only in Israel…

Israeli Arabs enjoy preferential treatment (affirmative action on campus, employment) and reach all high positions. Including a 2007 Arab president of the Jewish democratic State.
Case after case in Israeli courts systems, Israeli Arabs are often given preferences, especially in issues involving land.
On top of it, there’s a serious gross imbalance which Israeli-Arabs have an advantage in. Unlike Israeli Jews, the Arabs are not obligated to serve in the military, yet possess all rights Israeli Jews have.

Anti-Israel radicals try to portray, what Israel defends against a racist ‘ocean’ of entities who openly seek to wipe it off, as “racist”. If denying its right to survive is not racism, what is?
Just because Carter (has copied M. Bishara’s 2002 book title, after he was paid by the Arab lobby, and) so irresponsibly used the “apartheid” slur, doesn’t make it true.

[see also: Jimmy Carter and the Arab Lobby, by: Jacob Laksin, FPM Dec 18, 2006, The Arab Lobby: The Invisible Alliance That Undermines America’s Interests in the Middle East, by Mitchell Bard, (HarperCollins, 2010), p. 135 “…deemed to have been influenced by the vast sums of Arab money he has received.”


Let’s not forget, that it was the first chairman of the PLO, Ahmad Shukairy –who, aided the Mufti during his pact with Hitler in WW2 (Congressional record: proceedings and debates of the United States Congress: Volume 113, Part 12, United States. Congress – Govt. Print. Off., 1967. p. A-525)– who in 1961 in his UN hate speech, came up with the racist idea of erroneously comparing democratic Israel to “apartheid.”


In fact, Carter’s use of the slur was/is only intended to provoke and incite, to provoke debate and to provoke discussion as Carter admitted himself (CNN, Nov. 27, 2006).
He also said: “I recognize that Israel is a wonderful democracy with freedom of speech and equality of treatment under the law between Arab Israelis and Jewish Israelis.” (CNN, Dec. 12, 2006).

UN’s obsession is grotesque and Orwellian

Jewish World Review Dec. 5, 2008

By Jeff Jacoby

…so similar to the apartheid of an earlier era… Of which country was he speaking?
Was it Saudi Arabia, where public facilities are segregated by sex, and where a pervasive system of gender apartheid denies women the right to drive, to dress as they choose, to freely marry or divorce, to vote, to appear in public without a male “guardian,” or to give testimony on an equal basis with men?
Was it Jordan, where the law explicitly bars Jews from citizenship and where the sale of land to a Jew was for decades not only illegal, but punishable by death?

Was it Iran, where homosexuality is a capital crime — at least 200 Iranian gays were executed last year – and whose president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, asserted at Columbia University that there are no homosexuals in Iran?

Was it Sudan, where tens of thousands of black Africans in the country’s southern region, most of them Christians or animists, have been abducted and sold into slavery by Arab militias backed by the Islamist regime in Khartoum?

It was none of these. The General Assembly president, a radical Maryknoll priest who served as Nicaragua’s foreign minister during the Sandinista regime in the 1980s, was not referring to any of the Middle East’s Muslim autocracies and dictatorships, virtually all of which discriminate against ethnic and religious minorities. He was speaking of the Jewish state of Israel, the region’s lone democracy, and the only one that guarantees the legal equality of all its citizens – one-fifth of whom are Muslim and Christian Arabs.

[…] Like so much of what takes place at the UN, the obsession with demonizing Israel and extolling the Palestinians is grotesque and Orwellian.

KUHNER: Ban Koran-burning? – Washington Times‎ – Apr 7, 2011
Moreover, Muslim-majority societies are deeply hostile toward non-Muslims – especially, Christians and Jews. Bibles are banned in Saudi Arabia; when confiscated, many of them are burned or tossed into the garbage. Construction of churches and synagogues is prohibited. In Egypt, churches have been razed to the ground and Coptic Christians massacred. In Iraq, since the fall of Saddam Hussein, half of the Christian population has been exterminated or expelled; the other half lives in mortal fear. Iran executes Muslim converts to Christianity.

Shariah law – the legal basis of most Islamic states – is a form of religious apartheid, systematically classifying Christians and Jews as third-class citizens. Christophobia and anti-Semitism are rampant in the Muslim world. America’s political class, however, refuses to speak out.

Sharia would create legal apartheid in Britain, says David Cameron

Feb 26, 2008 – Islamic law for Muslims would create legal apartheid in Britain, David Cameron said today.

Surrender! – HUMAN EVENTS

Jul 8, 2008 – This will mean English law must become subordinate to Sharia law. This is Dhimmitude, an Islamic system of religious apartheid begun in the 7th century that…

Shilling for Shariah | FrontPageMagazine

Aug 30, 2011

… So Shariah is based upon a religious ideology that embraces gender apartheid, religious apartheid, cruel punishment and the denial of freedoms of speech, thought, and conscience. As such it cannot be compatible with western pluralistic democratic societies.

Sharia would create legal apartheid in Britain, says David Cameron

Feb 26, 2008 – Islamic law for Muslims would create legal apartheid in Britain, David Cameron said today.

New Republic – Sep 29, 2011

Wierdly, the progressives talk all the time about class, apartheid (in Israel where it doesn’t exist) but somehow doesn’t see us women as a class and is loathe to speak out about the mistreatment of half the people on the planet.


Africa, 1990
Pierre Etienne Dostert – [Stryker-Post Publications.,] 1990 – 207 pages – Page 195
Internal dissention occurred with the tightening of Islamic sharia laws within Mauritania. A ban on alcohol was particularly been resented by the non-Islamic people who constitute about 20% of the population, most of whom are seasonal workers from Senegal.
Interestingly, they published pamphlets accusing the Moslem majority of “Islamic apartheid.”


Coptic Youth Association in Britain

News From Egypt


The religious and cultural persecution of the Christians in Egypt

No month during the past twelve years has passed without the murder, beating or torture of Christians, or without their properties or churches being burned. In all cases, without exception, the criminals have been set free. An incident that took place from March 2-9, 1990 in the city of Abu-Kurkas in Upper Egypt and in all cities and villages of the Al-Minya province sheds some light into the real situation of Christian under persecution in middle eastern countries. Following Friday prayers, the Moslem fundamentalists ransacked and completely desecrated many Coptic churches, organizations and the YMCA. Also most of the Christian-owned pharmacies and stores were burned to the ground and 15 Christians were seriously injured and required hospitalization. Later five died from their wounds.

While the Moslem fundamentalists were ravaging churches and Christians-owned business and terrorizing the Copts, the city officials and police refused to intervene to stop the destruction and vandalism directed against the Christians. According to the BBC, two churches were burned down in the Northern Cairo by the Moslem fundamentalists. In addition, on April 15, 1990, they bombed the Coptic church and destroyed most of the Christian-owned stores in the city of Sinouris in the province of Al-Fayoum without any protection from the police force.

Hostility towards the Christians is being ignited and supported by the state-controlled mass media which characterizes Christians as “infidels” with a “false” Bible. Moslem Sheikhs exhort their followers to carry out a holy war against Christians everywhere. Elementary school Christian children are forced to read in the required reading books that Islam is the only true religion that should replace all other religions.

While Moslem fundamentalists burn churches, the Egyptian government makes it impossible for Christians to repair old churches or to build new ones. Newly constructed towns and cities in Egypt are deprived of churches in order to create pure Islamic societies and establish a kind of religious apartheid. The bishop of the city of Dariut in the province of Asyut, unable to secure a presidential permit to repair a 60 years-old church, had it repaired without such a permit. The minister of Interior promptly closed not only that church but nine others, as well.

The Egyptian government has stopped appointing Christians to the judicial system, the army and the police and has instructed government agencies and business not to hire Christians. Saudi Arabia is financially supporting Moslem organizations to form Islamic banks, corporations and educational institutions that exclude Christians and undermine Christian livelihoods. Egyptian and Saudi-Arabian governments are forcing Christians to covert to Islam to avoid unemployment, hunger and terrorism. The Egyptian government has seized lands in trust to the Coptic church and has given them to the Minister of Islamic Affairs. Such arbitrary confiscation deprives poor Christians of a major source of income. The Palestinians have better human rights under their occupation than the Copts under their government…

Christians in Egypt

Mr Edward Leigh – Westminster Hall – June 14, 2000

Copts… It is important to ensure fundamental rights of political representation, to end educational apartheid, to allow the building of new churches, and to prevent massacres and killings. I hope that the Government will make strong representation on all those matters.>

Egypt’s New Rulers Must Protect the Copts, Not Persecute Them | U.S. Copts Associaton

May 13, 2011 … The first and major failure and setback committed by the “Higher Military Egyptian Council” members was in their stubborn clinging to Article Two in the country’s constitution that legalizes discrimination and apartheid. It states verbatim: “Islam is the religion of the state, Arabic is its official language, and the principles of Islamic Sharia are the main source of legislation”.

In this realm of discrimination, the Council refused to appoint Christians and women in the judicial committee that was designated to study and propose constitutional amendments. The approved amendments were few, insubstantial and merely decorative and cosmetic.

ReligionToday News Summaries – Christian News, Conservative Commentary – May 30, 2007
Egypt: Keeping the Copts Subjugated

On 11 May, Muslims in the village of Bimha in Ayat district left their mosques after Friday prayers, armed and zealous for jihad against the indigenous Coptic Christian community and their solitary, partially built church. According to ASSIST News Service, the violent Muslim pogrom in Bimha bears the same features of other anti-Christian pogroms of the past decade. These familiar elements indicate that the security situation for Egypt’s indigenous Copts (who are Christian) is growing increasingly tenuous. The tragedy in Bimha takes Egypt another step backwards into religious and ethnic apartheid as it further reinforces Egypt’s indigenous Christian Copts not as equal citizens, but as a subjugated people – dhimmis. It also presents Egyptians with yet another precedent which demonstrates that Copts (Egypt’s remnant indigenous peoples, the descendants of the Pharaohs, Christians for nearly 2000 years) can be terrorized, robbed and killed with impunity.

Sectarian Violence: Egypt’s Version of Apartheid
By: Sherif Rizk

The following is an article published in the summer 2010 edition of The Caucus, a political magazine at the University of Ottawa

When dealing with the history and current affairs of Coptic Christians, two things should be kept in mind: history repeats itself, and there is a world outside the confines of Western media. Unfortunately, these two mantras were realized by some on two dates in the past decade or so: December 31st, 1999 and January 7th, 2010.

Coptic Christians are the largest Arab-speaking, non-Muslim minority in Egypt and the Middle East, which makes their affairs an unofficial litmus test of social life for minorities in the Middle East. Their history has always been filled with bloodshed, from persecution and systematic, forced conversion in pre-Christian eras to current social discrimination in their native Egypt. Unfortunately, their current state of discrimination does not differ much from pre-Christian times.

On December 31st, 1999, following a long trend of Islamic radicalism that has gripped Egypt since the late 1970s, violence broke out between Coptic Christians and Muslims in the Egyptian town of El-Kosheh. Evidence pointed out that a scuffle between a Muslim customer and a Christian merchant led to the widespread violence. A total of 21 Copts (ranging from 11 years old to 85 years old) were left murdered. Eyewitnesses claimed that the violence was purely sectarian, and that even some Egyptian police officers, most of which were Muslims themselves, participated in the violence against the small minority. The violence continued for days until security forces finally regained control of the town and arrested those responsible. To the dismay and anger of the entire Coptic community, the several dozen suspects of the massacre – all of whom were Muslims – were acquitted only a month before their trial took place. The only individual responsible for any of the violence was a Muslim man who was accused of murdering another Muslim in the onslaught of violence. As for the 21 Christians murdered, the court didn’t even mention them.

Fast forward to January 7th, 2010, only days after the tenth anniversary of the horrendous El-Kosheh Massacre. As Christians in the town of Nag Hammadi were leaving Church after a midnight mass celebrating Coptic Christmas, three cars drove by and opened fire on worshippers as they left the Church. The attacks left six dead, including a sixteen year old Christian. What was shocking is the eerie similarity to the El-Kosheh Massacre. The events of December 1999 were marked by lack of police sympathy to the victims, and even more shockingly, the lack of punishment on those responsible. The government went to great lengths to ensure that any Christians filing complaints or lawsuits were arrested and forced to sign statements recanting their claims. In 2010, the government arrested as much as 100 Christian youths in Nag Hammadi in order to force the Coptic church to drop its complaints against the Egyptian government. The perpetrators, yet to be caught, will probably not face any serious punishment or incarceration.

It is incredible to see how bloodshed in the Middle East now has a price on it. An increasing trend of marginalization of minorities in the Middle East is evident in Egypt, but also in Iraq, where extremists associate the native Christian population with their American enemies. Considering the fact that since 1972, 160 documented, premeditated attacks on Coptic Christians took place, and with more than 4,000 Copts killed and tens of millions of dollars in damages and losses estimated, their story warrants substantial coverage and more attention from the Western media about the state of affairs for minorities in the Middle East.

‘History repeats itself’ is often a phrase that is stated in a negative light, and this case is certainly no different. In fact, there will probably be another attack like those mentioned here because regardless of any protests or pressure from the Western world because the root problem will still exist, and will continue to exist for a long time. That problem is the ignorance and hatred that still manifests between the two. Like apartheid in South Africa, this problem needs to transcend the boundaries between the ignorance of segregation and the seemingly simple world that comes into view when we see each other as ‘black’ and ‘white’. Differences exist, and regardless of how hard we try to bridge those gaps, there will always be a conflict of interests. So instead of fantasizing about a fallacy of a uniform, unilateral world, it is time to understand that differences exist, and so will conflict, but there is absolutely no need to reach violent means. And that is, unfortunately, the one lesson that we have not been able to learn from history’s continuous loop, despite the fact that it has been a track that has played for far too long.


Pakistan, the land of religious apartheid and jackboot justice: a report to the UN committee against racial discrimination – Asian Centre for Human Rights, 2007 – History – 62 pages – Page 18
CHAPTER 4 The practice and patterns of discrimination against “non-Muslims’* Pakistan is all about appeasing the majority Muslims at the costs of the religious minorities. The religious minorities like the Ahmadis, Christians and Hindus …

‘Apartheid’ in Pakistan
By N. Mahmood Ahmad and Amjad Mahmood Khan
January 19, 2011; 1:30 PM ET

More than seven months have passed since the Pakistani Taliban attacked two Ahmadiyya Muslim mosques in Lahore massacring 86 Ahmadi Muslims and injuring more than a hundred more. In November, in connection with the release of the State Department’s Annual Report on International Religious Freedom, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton specially noted the carnage against Ahmadiyya holy sites. The Secretary also observed that such “infringements on religious freedom strain the bonds that sustain democratic societies” – a statement that is more profound than it may appear to be at first glance, for it draws a direct linkage between the protection of religious freedom and the very survival of democracy.
Indeed, the systematic persecution of Ahmadi Muslims in Pakistan is Exhibit A in the case that religious intolerance can fatally weaken liberal democracy. The State Department’s annual report concerning Pakistan, which makes mention of Ahmadi Muslims on 101 occasions, details what can only be described as religio-political apartheid directed at Ahmadi Muslims in Pakistan. Not only are members of the community expressly declared non-Muslims under the constitution and the subject of specific anti-Ahmadi provisions in Pakistan’s penal code (commonly referred to as the “blasphemy laws”), but they are also denied the most basic right in a democracy – the right to vote – through a series of extraordinary legal provisions.

From 1947 until 1978, all Pakistanis had an equal vote irrespective of creed. But in 1977, the military dictator Zia ul Haq took power, and the following year, he decreed that non-Muslims would have to register on separate “non-Muslim” electoral rolls. Apart from disenfranchising non-Muslims who did not want to be segregated in that manner, the decree was specifically targeted against Ahmadi Muslims because it would force them to disavow their Muslim identity by registering as “non-Muslims” on the electoral rolls. Naturally, Ahmadi Muslims, forced into a Hobson’s choice that would require them to declare themselves non-Muslims regardless of which option they chose, have had to sit out national, state and local elections.

The separate electorate system for Muslims and non-Muslims remained in place even after Pakistan returned to a democratic form of government. Ironically, Pervez Musharraf, yet another military dictator of a more liberal bent than Zia, issued an executive order calling for its elimination in 2002. President Musharraf was duly hailed as a benevolent despot for restoring the rights of non-Muslims and Ahmadis, but the true extent of the power of Pakistan’s religious extremist element became apparent when, within a matter of months, he was forced to reverse course.

While continuing to allow non-Muslims to cast their votes alongside Muslims in a joint electorate, subsequent amendments to Musharraf’s original Order specifically stated that the “status of Ahmadis [was] . . . to remain unchanged.” As a result, Ahmadi Muslims presently are the only religious community in Pakistan who cannot freely vote.
This system of religious segregation at the voting booths is enforced through national identity cards that require each individual to list their confessional creed, and anyone wishing to be listed as a Muslim must denounce the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community’s founder – Mirza Ghulam Ahmad – as a false prophet and his followers as non-Muslim.

Pakistan’s apartheid regime is not only a human rights travesty, but also a national tragedy since Ahmadi Muslims are considered to be among Pakistan’s most literate and educated citizenry (notably, the country’s only Nobel Laureate, Dr. Abdus Salam, was an Ahmadi Muslim – having ignored his achievements during his life, the Pakistani state ordered that the word “Muslim” be effaced from his gravestone).
Since Musharraf backtracked on the issue of voting rights for Ahmadis in 2002, Pakistan has been graced with yet another democratic government, this time led by Asif Zardari. And yet, there has been no public discussion regarding the re-enfranchisement of Ahmadis, and the religious parties have consistently blocked any attempts to amend the constitution to remove the declaration of Ahmadis as non-Muslims. It bears noting that Mr. Zardari’s father-in-law, the late Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, was responsible for the enactment of that declaration into the constitution.

There can be no doubt that something is rotten in the state of Pakistan. Secretary Clinton’s remarks provide an astute diagnosis: state-sanctioned religious intolerance lies at the very heart of Pakistan’s problems, and there is nothing that the extremists are more willing to fight to preserve than the apartheid regime enforced upon Ahmadi Muslims by the Pakistani state. These extremists include not only the terrorists but also their fellow travelers, such as the Jamat-e-Islami, a political party which has made the anti-Ahmadi cause its raison d’etre.
Thus, the true test of Pakistan’s mettle will be if it can stand up and finally rid itself of the ugly stain of religious persecution and once again be counted among the community of free and democratic nations. And President Zardari can demonstrate that he is committed to that goal by signing an executive order re-enfranchising Ahmadis. And it is incumbent upon the United States, along with the wider international community, to match its rhetoric with action in pressing for equal voting rights for Ahmadis.

UN body accuses Pakistani govt of ‘religious apartheid – Daily Times Aug 9, 2007… accused the Pakistani government of committing “religious apartheid” and practising “rampant discrimination based on the ethnic, …


India-Bangladesh cooperation broadening measures
Burhanuddin Khan Jahangir, Jayanta Kumar Ray, University of Calcutta. Dept. of History – [K.P. Bagchi & Co.,] 1997 – 129 pages – Page 104
There is no reason why India should continue to abet Islamic apartheid in Bangladesh. The emergence of a small section of enlightened people in Bangladesh is a matter of great hope. But they might lose heart in their campaign against …

Organiser: Volume 40 – [Bharat Prakashan.,] 1988 – Page xvii
FRANKLY SPEAKING JULY 3, 198* ORGANISER Islamic apartheid in Pakistan and Bangladesh BANGLADESH has been declared as an Islamic State. The resistance movement in Bangladesh is catching on.



Congressional Record, V. 144, Pt. 17, October 7, 1998 to October 9, 1998 – Page 24523 – 2004 – 1374 pages

In Iran, those who believe in the Baha’i faith are forcibly repressed by the Iranian Government. They are denied the right to assemble and elect their religious officials, their property is confiscated and they are denied basic civil and legal rights. More than 200 Baha’is have been killed in Iran since 1989. Christians and Jews likewise face persecution in Iran, including discrimination, imprisonment, and death.
One Christian human rights groups describes the treatment of Christians and Jews as “Religious apartheid.” In Saudi Arabia, only the practice of the Sunni form of Islam is permitted. No public expression of Christianity is allowed. …

Hoover digest, Issues 3-4 – Hoover Institution on War, Revolution, and Peace, 2003 – Political Science – Page 48
Hoover Institution on War, Revolution, and Peace – 2003
As soon as Ayatollah Khomeini returned to Iran and realized the organizational weakness of the middle class, he began to renege on his promises. The new democratic constitution that was drafted during the months leading to the revolution was scuttled, and in its place a draconian set of laws was rammed through the mullah-dominated Constitutional Assembly. Instead of the promised democracy, a veritable apartheid was created, where a small band of mullahs gave themselves an exclusive monopoly on power, privilege, and wealth…
Saddam Husseins attack on Iran in 1980 delayed, for the duration of the eight- year war, an open confrontation between the advocates of democracy and the supporters of the new Islamic apartheid.

Ahwaz Human Rights Organization…

but since 1925 its been dominated and ruled by the Persian ethnic group –thus creating a cultural and a linguistic apartheid. I am here to speak to you on behalf of Arab-Iranian or Ahwazi Arab minority in Iran.

Working to save the life of a Christian pastor in Iran‎
Washington Post (blog) – Jordan Sekulow – Sep 30, 2011

As Pastor Firouz Sadegh-Khandjani, a Member of the Council of Elders for the Church of Iran and a close personal friend of Nadarkhani, told me on my radio show, Iran’s “Constitution makes it clear . . . that Christians have the right to accept their faith,” but Christian face “a religious apartheid because the tendency is not to respect the rights of minorities, minorities are not considered citizens, it is worse than apartheid because in apartheid it was written that we have apartheid, but in Iran it is not written . . . but legally we are in apartheid.”

Iranian pastor’s life still in jeopardy

Catholic News Agency – Kevin J. Jones
Washington D.C., Oct 4, 2011 / 10:50 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Iranian Christian pastor Yousef Nadarkhani still faces imminent execution, though officials no longer say he is charged with apostasy
Sekulow said that one Iranian pastor described the situation as an unwritten “Apartheid” system like that which once governed a South Africa segregated along racial lines.

Even an explicit “Apartheid” system would be preferable for providing regularity, that pastor said. But at present, Iranian Christians “don’t know when they are going to start these waves of arrests.”

UNPO: Iran An Unknown Apartheid [2010]

Iranian representatives plead for international community to address bigotry towards minorities.
UNPO representatives addressed Permanent Missions in the UN on Friday 12 February to decry the situation of minorities within the Islamic Republic of Iran, just days before Iran comes under examination in their first ever Universal Periodic Review at the UN Human Rights Council.

The event hosted by Interfaith International and UNPO provided a platform for debate and discussion of rights violations with a particular focus on the Baloch, Ahwazi Arab, Azerbaijani Turk and Kurdish minorities.

In reference to the obstacles placed before religious and ethnic minorities in the workplace and to gain access to university, Mr. Nasser Boladai from West Balochistan denounced life for many citizens in Iran as a form of “apartheid about which the world is unaware”.


[July 2003]

TEHRAN 8 July (IPS) As Iranians are taking their breath and the world is watching carefully what will happen on Wednesday 9 July, a crucial date that the clerical authorities have mobilised all their forces for preventing any demonstrations or meetings, leaders of Iranian students, in an open letter to Mr. Kofi Annan, the General Secretary of the United Nations, have complained from the present regime in Iran, one that they described as a “political apartheid that ignores systematically the right of its citizens for human rights and deny them any freedom”.

“We are complaining to you because the political apartheid has taken all hopes from the Iranian people, because it is denying us self rule and the right of choice, the right to be master of our own destiny, because it has lowered our expectations to the lowest limits possible and also because we are worried to see the experience of our neighbours be repeated here”, the signatories, representing students associations from thirty Iranian universities said.

In the letter, the students not only openly call for a secular, free, democratic State in Iran, but also the removal of all kind of discriminations, being it political, social, religious, ethnic and cultural and denounce the privileges the clerical cast and their families enjoy against the rest of the population, regarded as a second class cast.

Clenched With A String Of Human Rights Atrocities, Apartheid Policies Against Iranian Baha’is

By Omri Ceren – June 9, 2010

eligious Minorities In Iran: It’s been more than two years since Iranian authorities arrested seven leaders of Iran’s Baha’i community. The two …

Islamic apartheid Regime in Iran can’t stop our wish for freedom

From Salman Rushdie to WTC

The atrocities of Islamic Apartheid has been around long before they took power in Iran in 1979 Revolution. The fatwa to kill Ahmad Kasravi, by the mullahs in

Help us in defeating religious apartheid in Iran. …10/13/2008

Evangelical Pastor Faces Imminent Execution in Iran – AOI Observer

Sep 30, 2011 – Working to save the life of a Christian pastor in Iran … As Pastor Firouz Sadegh-Khandjani, a Member of the Council of Elders for the Church of Iran and a close personal friend of Nadarkhani, told me on my radio show, Iran’s “Constitution makes it clear . . . that Christians have the right to accept their faith,” but Christian face “a religious apartheid because the tendency is not to respect the rights of minorities, minorities are not considered citizens, it is worse than apartheid because in apartheid it was written that we have apartheid, but in Iran it is not written . . . but legally we are in apartheid.”

“Academic apartheid” in Iran

This is the Official WebSite of the Bahá’ís of Norway.


This is not just about my faith, but of violation of fundamental human rights, says NTNU student Samina Kamali in an interview with student newspaper “The tassel.”

“As a consequence of the persecution was Samina Kamali and his family had to flee to Norway,” the student newspaper. “If the family had been in the country would not Kamali had access to Iranian universities. Now you want the 26 year old NTNU student to focus on one of the Iranian regime’s lesser-known crimes. “

Members of the largest religious minority in Iran, the Baha’i community, have no right to higher education in the country. The student newspaper called it “academic apartheid”.

See “The tassel” No. 16 2011:


Human rights and the Chinese in Indonesia [Gender for Minority, Gender and Human Rights]
Aimee Dawis | August 13th, 2009
by Aimee Dawis
The SBKRI (Surat Bukti Kewarganegaraan Republik Indonesia) or the Proof of Indonesian Citizenship is a form of apartheid ( segregation) or state racial discrimination.

Genocide in West Papua? The role of the Indonesian state apparatus and a current needs assessment of the Papuan people
by John Wing with Peter King

A report prepared of the West Papua Project at the Centre of Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Sydney, and ELSHAM Jayapura, Papua.
August 2005
… Genocide in West Papua?
2 A New Apartheid?
Freedom of movement is being severely restricted in Papua. This restriction has been compared to thesystem of apartheid in South Africa during the era before democratic elections and self-rule. Types of acts
of apartheid in West Papua include the following:
• Freedom of movement in many regions is very difficult due to arbitrary acts of the security
• People have to have a surat jalan, or travel permit, when traveling to their home villages
• People are detained with no clear reason for unspecified periods, for months or even years, and tried with no clear charges
• Papuans who are members of the military apparatus of the Republic of Indonesia will sometimes not be given any arms to equip themselves to handle crowds, whereas those coming from Indonesia will always be fully equipped with rifles, and/or pistols
• The Indonesian newcomers to Papua looking for jobs can easily get one, often within a week.
Meanwhile, Papuans have to wait for years to get one. This is a form of deliberate or “structural”
discrimination over the right to work
• Papuan churches and schools in the military-targeted or military operation areas always become targets of vandalism and arson by the security apparatus
• The security apparatus uses terms of denigration that degrade the dignity of West Papuans, e.g., that Papuans are animals (e.g., monkeys). A clear example can be found in the Abepura case of
• HIV/AIDS has never been seriously handled, even though the Province of Papua records the highest number of victims in Indonesia. Especially in regions rich with gaharu, the military is involved as
pimps bringing in HIV/AIDS affected prostitutes from Java and other parts of Indonesia…

The Indigenous world – Page 268
International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs – IWGIA, 07/31/2006 , 2006 – 575 Pages
…. and prostitution and the spread of HIV/AIDS. The deployment of 15000 additional troops is planned for the period 2005 to 2009, which will bring troop presence of 15000 additional troops is planned for the period 2005 to 2009, which will bring troop presence up to between 45000 and 50000. It is part of the armed forces’ plan to set up a new division of elite troops in West Papua. Most of these will be stationed in the border area with Papua Niugini. A new apartheid? In their second chapter, the authors compare the restrictions on freedom of movement imposed by the Indonesian state to the system of apartheid in South Africa during the era before democratic elections and self-rule.

West Papuan rebels struggle for freedom
(Nov. 11, 2010)

Defying Indonesia’s foreign media ban on West Papua, English filmmaker Dominic Brown risked his life to spend two months undercover with West Papuan rebels and returned with the story the Indonesian government has tried so hard to suppress.

“It was like apartheid. Indonesia’s transmigration policy has resulted in thousands of Indonesians being shipped over to West Papua, taking control of the towns and the jobs to the point where the West Papuans have been marginalised to near-extinction. Resistance results in death “Amnesty International puts the West Papuan death toll at anything between 100,000 to 400,000 in the last four decades. It’s genocide, make no mistake.”

The Apartheid That Dare Not Be Named… 2.0: The Blogmocracy
22 Oct 2011 – Islamic Indonesia brutally invaded Christian West Papua, the western half of the … The apartheid against the West Papuans, contemporary…


BBC NEWS| Asia-Pacific | Malaysia women ‘suffer apartheid’

Last Updated: Wednesday, 8 March 2006, 06:29 GMT

By Jonathan Kent

BBC News, Kuala Lumpur

Marina Mahathir says new laws will make daily life worse for Muslim women

The daughter of Malaysia’s former prime minister has launched a scathing attack on the roles and status of Muslim women in the country.
Marina Mahathir, a prominent campaigner for women’s rights, compared the lot of women to that of black South Africans under apartheid.

She described Muslim women as second-class citizens who were held back by discrimination.

The comments were written for her regular newspaper column.

The column, which was due to be published in Tuesday’s Star newspaper, did not appear.

‘Bound and gagged’

Few comparisons could be more hurtful.

Malaysia led by Mahathir Mohamad was in the forefront of the international campaign to end white minority rule in South Africa.

But his daughter Marina has described Muslim women in Malaysia as subject to a form of apartheid – second-class citizens held back by discriminatory rules that do not apply to non-Muslim women.

Her outburst appears to have been prompted by recent changes to Malaysia’s Islamic family law that makes it easier for Muslim men to take multiple wives, to divorce them and to take a share of their property.

The women’s ministry encouraged female lawmakers to vote for the measures, saying they could be amended later.

That prompted widespread criticism and has led Miss Marina to suggest the ministry be split in two – one to help non-Muslim women fight discrimination, the other to keep Muslim women, in her words, bound and gagged.

However, compared to many other countries both in South East Asia and the wider Muslim world, Malaysian women – Muslims included – play a prominent role both in business and public life.

Learning from Malaysia’s mistakes
Chinese Indonesians must re-enter politics in order to fully exercise their citizenship
Christianto Wibisono
Global Nexus Institute
[Inside Indonesia 95: Jan-Mar 2009]
Chinese Indonesians today enjoy social and political freedoms that can be compared with the earliest period of Indonesian independence…This statement may have just been a cynical ploy to attract the support of Chinese and Indian Malaysians – when Anwar was deputy prime minister he was a strong promoter of pro-Malay policy. But his comments were quite remarkable as they took aim at the very roots of the NEP. However, it will take more than statements if Malaysia is to deal with the challenges of integration after 50 years of ethnic apartheid. In the meantime, Malaysia risks a return to ethnic violence.

Knocking Malaysia Back To Days Of Apartheid With “1Melayu 1Bumiputera”

Friday, 22 April 2011 15:57

KUALA LUMPUR – Loh Seng Kok said that twitching the idealism of 1Malaysia which was mooted by Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak into a racial superiority concept of “1Melayu 1Bumiputera” is no different than to regress Malaysia into legalized racial discrimination.

In his statement today, Loh said that to punish the Chinese voters for exercising their democratic right to choose is to punish democracy itself.

“It would be more appropriate if Utusan called on the government to address the grievances of the Chinese community. Utusan should not be ignorant of the fact that Brisan Nasional is not made up of one party solely, but composes 13 political parties – each representing the aspirations of the respective community. Thus to push for “1Melayu 1Bumputera” defeats the very basis of BN itself and will backfire against the BN coalition as a whole at the ballot box.”

He added that Utusan’s racist diatribe appears to be a hidden agenda at helping to swing votes to the Opposition, in particular DAP which during the recently concluded Sarawak state elections had played on Chinese emotions.

Loh further questions “As an afterthought, would Utusan’s take on “1Melayu 1Bumiputera” include indigenous Malaysians like native Christian Sarawakians who make up 50% of Sarawak’s population? Would this “1Melayu 1Bumiputera” also include the likes of Dr Mahathir Muhammad who has acknowledged that he has Indian ancestry, Rafidah Aziz (who in the book Found in Malaysia in her own words) acknowledged she is of “pendatang” stock from Sumatera or Hishamuddin Tun Hussein Onn who has Turkish lineage?”

The MCA Central Commitee member said that to give Utusan Malaysia a detailed response on its typical publication of race-incitement is to actually give it unwarranted publicity which the newspaper does not deserve at all. He added that it is unfortunate that when media independence is misused to be a harbinger of race sectarianism, it might work against the party and community it intends to help.


The Weekly review – Stellascope Ltd., 1993 – Page 44

The Weekly Review, May 28, 1993


[…] Africa Khartoum have changed the status quo with the present one having imposed the contentious sharia as the law of the land. The rebels content that these policies have resulted in the severe discrimination of the non-Muslim and non-Arab segments of the population in economic, political and social spheres — a form of “religious apartheid.”
[…] uncompromisingly to such an extent that the southern Sudanese and international human rights groups charge that the government is prepared to wipe out any of southern Sudan’s more than 8 million non-Muslims who refuse to’ convert. One tactic, according to western diplomats, is the export of food surpluses harvested in the north to other Muslim countries while the south continues to starve. The United Nations World Food Programme estimates that 800000 Sudanese face..

Burden of Nationality: memoirs of an African aidworker/journalist, 1970s-1990s – Jacob J. Akol [Paulines Publications Africa,] – 2006 – 288 pages – Page 65
Except for the period between 1972 and 1982, during which the South exercised limited autonomy, the close to four decades of independence had been mostly bloody, with the North reverting to the 19th century policy aimed at forcing Islam, the Arabic language and Arab culture on the African peoples of the South.

Both the Government of Sudan and the rebel Sudan Peoples Liberation Movement/ Army, SPLM/A, stand accused of human rights abuses by human rights bodies such as “Human Rights Watch Africa.” In its latest report, “In the Name of God,” the human rights body accused the government of, among a long list of abuses, belligerent discrimination against non-Muslims… Christian leaders in Sudan feel the persecution of non-Muslims even more keenly. In his 1994 Christmas message, Bishop Paride Taban of the Catholic Diocese of Torit in Southern Sudan, likened the Sudan’s situation to the former apartheid system in South Africa : It was very sad to hear that the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) disbanded its Committee Against Apartheid at its last meeting in Tunis, telling the world that it has no longer an objective now that there is no more apartheid in Africa, while in reality the Islamic Fundamentalism in Sudan is worse than apartheid. The policy of all the successive governments of Khartoum has been one of conquest, exploitation, slavery, Islamisation and war.

Racial, and Islamic apartheid in Sudan..

Sudan: Will the Republic of South Sudan Accept Another Baqt the Dilemmas of Post Independence Agreement

By Deng Dongrin Akuany – Jan 6, 2012

[…] The Baqt in general was an Arab Muslim’s practice probably during the Islamic expansion which overran many countries including Syria, Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria, Mauritania, Iraq, Egypt, Libya Sudan etc. And during those wars, the Arabs would conquer, occupy and take booties (i.e. slaves, land and movable properties) where they were victorious over their enemies or victims. And where they failed to conquer immediately, they would impose the baqt or the payment in slaves and other valuable properties, plus certain conditions intended to weaken the indigenous socio-economic and political systems and the people at large, so that when the Arab Muslims become strong again they would conquer and colonized them. For the Arab Muslims there would always be no permanent peace with infidels or non Muslims until they surrender and become the dhimmes under the Arab Islamic Apartheid, as the third class citizens in an Islamic State, or if they submit to conversion and assimilation into Arab Islamic culture and religion, yet they would still become third or fourth class citizens because they would be treated as non Asharaf (i.e. non true Arab race or a non relative of the Prophet), non Awalad el Bled or non members of the Brown Arab Muslim Sudanese tribesmen (BRAMS) which is usually consisting of two main prominent Arab nationalities which include Jaaleen, and el Shaageen and the Arabised Danagaleen or Nubians. In deed the non Arabs Muslim converts are always treated as outsiders within the Arab based Sectarian communities who consider themselves as “Alaharaf” the relatives of the Prophet” or Awalad el Bled ( the children of the Land etc).

[Muslim controlled areas of] NIGERIA

This is the News Analysis segment of the Voice of Biafra International (VOBI) broadcasts

For November 25th, 2006


And in spite of all that, the State of Nigeria’s anti-Igbo anti-Biafra policies today are even more brazen than the known arrogantly mean and racist Apartheid’s laws against the African owner-dwellers of South Africa. What could be more macabre than an Igbo such as Mr. Nweke, mounting the podium to try to sell the UK audience that Nigeria is doing well? In what? we ask. For whom? we ask. And, by whom is Nigeria doing well?

Seated in that audience were other Igbo efulefu: what was going on in their minds as Nweke was lying through his teeth about how good Nigeria is getting? If these Igbo no-gooders have forgotten that in Nigeria today, the so-called President is misusing all the instruments of State to hound his perceived enemies and opposition, including even the so-called Vice President of Nigeria; that there is no chance of credible elections come 2007 for Nigeria—if any at all; that the 2006 Nigerian Census cannot even be released un-tampered with or un-afraid of the consequences; that Nigeria cannot manage its own Roadways, its own Railways, its own Waterways, nor its own Airways; that there is no reliable potable Water system, no reliable Electric Power system, and no reliable fuel for even domestic cooking activities; that Sharia rules in Muslim Northern Nigeria in place of and superior to Nigeria’s constitution and laws; that Obasanjo is the most corrupt usurper of all the other usurpers of Nigeria’s throne while yet, he pretends to be an anti-corruption crusader;—if the efulefu Igbo there could forget all that—how in hell could they also forget that as Nweke spoke, all of Igboland-Biafraland is under armed occupation by Nigeria, and treated as such; that Igbo and Biafran Youth have no jobs, can’t go to school, can’t graduate from schools; and are constantly hounded by the Nigeria Police on Obasanjo’s specific orders, detained without reason and without charge in Police cells where they are killed by the police; or shot in the back as they flee from the police on our own streets—crimes the Nigeria Police got tired of pretending did not happen, and are now gleefully announcing their own Police’s criminal action against our people—in public and to the press, to boot? How could they forget? Just because ignoramus Nweke is paid to forget all that, they, too, also forget? Heavens help them…

The Advocate : Sanctions will work in Nigeria
The Advocate – Jun 20, 1996
The sanctions against the oil which is produced in the predominantly Christian south will deny the Northern-Islamic apartheid-tribalists the resources for building,ar:1&source=newspapers

Oil-rich Nigeria will become Islamic soon, warn Dutch MPs – Mar 16, 2009
By Adriana Stuijt
Islamic Apartheid: Sharia law:
“Already, in twelve of the 36 states of Nigeria, Sharia has already become the law – this is the Islamic Apartheid law which discriminates against all non-muslims and which treats women as inferior creatures’.
“And once the Jihadists have gained the majority in only seven more Nigerian states, the federal government of Nigeria will be forced into adapting the country’s constitution to include Sharia law – which means that in effect, all of Nigeria will then become an Islamic country’.
Plateau – it’s not ‘sectarian violence’ but a Jihad..



Christians Marginalized in Lebanese Elections

Compass Direct (, Oct 17, 1996. Country: Lebanon. Region: Middle East & North Africa. Used by permission of Compass Direct.


BEIRUT, Lebanon (Compass)–Many Lebanese believe that their five-round Parliamentary elections concluded on September 15 were a fraud. Half of the Lebanese Parliament’s 128 seats are reserved for Christians. But most popular Christian leaders lost, while Christians with minimal backing were able to win seats.

A new electoral law was introduced just days before the election which created electoral districts that favored Muslim candidates, along with Christian candidates endorsed by Muslim leaders–leaving opponents with little time for criticism.

The law also stipulated that every Lebanese citizen had to vote in the place where he lived before the civil war started in 1975. Yet approximately 80 percent of the more than 600,000 persons displaced by the war are Christians, according to the Foundation for Human and Humanitarian Rights in Lebanon. This put thousands of Christians at a serious disadvantage.

According to former army commander Michel Aoun, in exile in France, “The new law establishes the political persecution of Christians and constitutes a law of apartheid.”


Palestinians: Aggressors, Not Victims

By: David Meir-Levi

November 27, 2007

reading of Khalidi’s treatment of this subject reveals that the only early example of what he calls “Palestinian National sentiment” is actually an example of Muslim religious apartheid. The Muslim religious leaders of Jerusalem protested the Sultan’s permitting French representatives to establish an office in Jerusalem in the late 18th century. The Jerusalem Muslim religious elite were affronted that an infidel “Ifrangi” (Frenchman) not under a dhimmi treaty should be allowed to pollute the sacred precinct with his presence. Disdain and disgust for someone of another religion is hardly an example of nationalist sentiment.

For Zion’s sake – Page 106
Yehuda Zvi Blum – 1987 – 242 pages
Anyone who asserts that it is illegal for a Jew to live in Judea and Samaria just because he is a Jew, is no better than an advocate of apartheid… Article 6, paragraph 3, of the Jordanian Nationality Law of 4 February 1954 expressly prohibits Jews from holding Jordanian citizenship. Another Jordanian enactment stipulates that the sale of land to a Jew is punishable by death, …

Bethlehem Christians Break Silence on Muslim Oppression – IRIS – Jan 26, 2011

After many years… the truth has been revealed. Christians are fleeing every Muslim-majority territory because of the apartheid discrimination encouraged by Muslim sharia law. Land theft works because the testimony of non-Muslims is weighed less in every sharia court in the world.

Public Diplomacy in the Fight against Radical Islam – Jerusalem Summit

APublic Diplomacy in the Fight against Radical Islam – Jerusalem Summi
In addition to this rampant gender apartheid that prevails throughout most Muslim society, there is an additional variant of pernicious and pervasive persecution – on the basis of faith and creed. This discrimination against nearly all non-Muslim faiths is nothing less than what can – and must – be termed creed apartheid.
The fate of Christians under Palestinian administration has not been reassuring either. According to CAMERA ( Committee for Accuracy in Public Diplomacy in the Fight against Radical Islam – Jerusalem Summit
Middle East Reporting in America), the Christian population declined 29 percent in the West Bank and 20 percent in the Gaza Strip from 1997 to 2002. (Interestingly enough, in the period 1995–2003, Israel’s Arab Christian population grew 14.1 percent.)

Indeed, under the Palestinian regime, Christians also have to face policies of discrimination and intimidation, which are reducing the Christian population at an alarming rate and obliterating signs and symbols of Judeo-Christian heritage in the Holy Land . Documented research on the persecution of Christians by the Palestinian Authority includes social and economic discrimination; boycott and extortion of Christian businesses; violations of real property rights; crimes against Christian women; incitement by Palestinian Authority against Christians; and failure of the Palestinian security forces to protect Christians.

South African Charge of Israeli Apartheid Rings Hollow … Apr 5, 2011

I am critical of Bishop Tutu’s call for boycotts against apartheid Israel, because it is a totally false charge. Israel is the only nation in the Middle East that does not practice any form of apartheid: Jordan prohibits Jews from becoming citizens or owning land; Saudi Arabia practices gender apartheid; all Muslim countries engage in sexual orientation apartheid; Hamas is notorious for its anti-Christian apartheid; and the Palestinian Authority has said that “no Jew” will ever be allowed to live in a Palestinian state. Israel, on the other hand, is a racially diverse country in which Arabs serve in the Knesset, on the Supreme Court, on university faculties and even in the Cabinet. The court that recently convicted Israel’s former president of rape included an Arab judge. Nothing like this ever happened in apartheid South Africa.

Indeed, Tutu’s South Africa, remains a far more segregated country today than Israel. Poor blacks live in segregated temporary settlements, and de facto apartheid can be seen throughout South Africa.

April 28, 2009 Who is the Apartheid state?
Palestinian gets death sentence for selling land to Jews A Palestinian military court has sentenced a man to death by hanging for selling land to an Israeli company. Land sales are considered treason by the Palestinians because of their long-running dispute with the Israelis, however the sentence is unlikely to be implemented. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas routinely withholds the required approval for executions. Several others are on death row as suspected informants for Israel. The sentence was handed down Tuesday in a military court in the West Bank city of Hebron after two days of closed-door hearings.

PA: Death penalty for those who sell land to Jews By KHALED ABU TOAMEH

Apr 1, 2009 23:24 | Updated Apr 2, 2009 14:09

Palestinian Authority, Jerusalem, Salaam Fayad The Palestinian Authority has issued yet another warning to Palestinians against selling their homes or properties to Jews, saying those who violate the order would be accused of “high treason” – a charge that carries the death penalty. The latest warning was issued on Wednesday by the Chief [Islamic] Judge of the Palestinian Authority, Sheikh Tayseer Rajab Tamimi, who reminded the Palestinians of an existing fatwa [religious decree] than bans them from selling property to Jews.

Article: PA: Death penalty for those who sell land to Jews 51. Nothing in South African apartheid came close to this racism. Where is the UN Human Rights Commission? Rhetorical question. They probably wrote it.

The United Nations Should Not Recognize an Apartheid, Judenrein, Islamic Palestine

September 21, 2011

The new Palestine will have the very “law of return” that it demands that Israel should give up. All Palestinians, no matter where they live and regardless of whether they have ever set foot in Palestine, will be welcome to the new state, while a Jew whose family has lived in Hebron for thousands of years will be excluded.

To summarize, the new Palestinian state will be a genuine apartheid state. It will practice religious and ethnic discrimination, it will have one official religion and it will base its laws on the precepts of one religion. Imagine what the status of gays will be under Sharia law!..

IDF Confronts Terrorism, Islamic Jihad in Israel As Abbas Declares
Palestine At UN

[Sep. 23, 2011]

The PLO’s ambassador wants an Apartheid Palestine. No Jews or Christians, a state based on Islamic Sharia law.

Arab League and PA are Real Apartheid Entities
Steven Shamrak
Mar 11, 2010

Countering Israel Apartheid Week folly
In 1948, the Arab League of Nations applied the Apartheid model to Palestine, and declared that Jews must be denied rights as citizens of Israel, while declaring a total state of war to eradicate the new Jewish entity, a war that continues today.

In 1948, at the directive of the Arab League of Nations, Jordan devastated the vestiges of Jewish life from Judea and Samaria, and burned all synagogues in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem.

In 1948, member states of the Arab League of Nations began to strip the human rights of Jews and to expel entire Jewish communities who had resided in their midst for centuries. And since its inception in 1994, the newly constituted Palestinian Authority, created by the PLO, has prepared the rudiments of a Palestinian State, modelled on the rules of Apartheid and institutionalized discrimination:

1. The right of Palestinian Arab refugees and their descendents to return to Arab villages lost in 1948 will be protected by the new Palestinian state. (Jewish refugees are not allowed to return to Gaza and other Arab controlled lands)
2. While 20% of Israel’s citizens are Arabs, not one Jew will be allowed to live in proposed Palestinian State.

3. Anyone who sells land to a Jew will be liable to the death penalty in the Palestinian State. (This law is already enforced by the PA)

4. Those who murder Jews are honored on all official Palestinian media outlets (and by ruling officials, like Abbas).

5. PA maps prepared for the Palestinian State depict all of Palestine (including Israel ) under Palestinian rule.

6. PA maps of Jerusalem for the Palestinian State once again delete the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem.

7. Recent PA documents claim all of Jerusalem for the future Palestinian State.

8. The right of Jewish access to Jewish holy places is to be denied in the new Palestinian State.
9. The Draft Palestinian State Constitution denies juridical status to any religion except for Islam. (In the West Bank under Jordan, since 1948 till 1967, the practice of Judaism and Christianity was ‘only’ restricted)

10. No system which protects human rights or civil liberties will exist in a Palestinian State. (Since the Oslo Accord was signed, the PA has shown its complete disregard for the human rights of individuals, political groups and religious minorities)

If that is not a formula for a totalitarian apartheid state of Palestine, then what is?


Saudi Arabia’s Apartheid

By Colbert I. King
Saturday, December 22, 2001; Page A23

In response to last week’s column concerning treatment of women in the Middle East, an American official who just completed a tour of duty in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, wrote: “As a husband and as a father of a teenage daughter, I can assure you that life even for Western women in Saudi Arabia is every bit as bad as you describe. Saudi official assurances that non-Muslims need not follow Muslim codes of dress and behavior are utter nonsense, and the very real threat of punishment or abuse for not wearing abbayas [head-to-toe black cloaks] or for going out unaccompanied leaves most Western women in Riyadh to live lives of silent depression.”

He said he and his wife were amused to read early press reports from Afghanistan about the oppression of women and religious minorities. “Virtually everything described there was taking place in Saudi Arabia, with the exception that at least the Taliban permitted other religions to exist in their country. This is absolutely forbidden in Saudi Arabia.”

Then he threw in this grabber: “One of the (still) untold stories, however, is the cooperation of U.S. and other Western companies in enforcing sexual apartheid in Saudi Arabia. McDonald’s, Pizza Hut, Starbucks, and other U.S. firms, for instance, maintain strictly segregated eating zones in their restaurants. The men’s sections are typically lavish, comfortable and up to Western standards, whereas the women’s or families’ sections are often run-down, neglected and, in the case of Starbucks, have no seats. Worse, these firms will bar entrance to Western women who show up without their husbands. My wife and other [U.S. government affiliated] women were regularly forbidden entrance to the local McDonald’s unless there was a man with them.”

He said the only exception to their humiliation was Dunkin’ Donuts, “which had an open seating area in which men and women freely ate at adjoining tables just as in the West.

“This willing compliance with apartheid on the part of U.S. firms was perhaps the most galling.” I was in Riyadh and Jeddah in Saudi Arabia during the 1980s; the forced seclusion of women from public life is nothing new. But Riyadh didn’t have a McDonald’s at the time. The kingdom got its first Mickey D’s in 1993. Therefore, I don’t pretend to know whether McDonald’s or U.S. restaurants have a policy of aiding and abetting sexual apartheid. But something told me the McDonald’s Corp. in Oak Brook, Ill., would have the answer.

So I called the McDonald’s communications office this week and got Ann Rozenich. She checked around and called back to say: “All restaurants in Saudi Arabia, no matter what kind — formal or quick service — have two dining areas. McDonald’s, like other quick-service restaurants — for example, Kentucky Fried Chicken and Burger King — all have two designated areas: one for families and the other for singles, all males. The restaurants also have two separate entrances.”

Rozenich said McDonald’s, like other companies operating in Saudi Arabia, must respect and observe local customs. Which calls to mind an old 1940s lyric: “It seems to me that I have heard that song before, with that same old familiar score.”

Ah, yes. South Africa.

Once upon a time, that country also had a longstanding official policy of strict segregation. As with Saudi Arabia today, South Africa maintained a system in which a huge segment of its society faced discrimination in all walks of life and was under the authority of men wielding power without any fear of being held accountable for their actions. The only difference: South Africa’s victims were black; in Saudi Arabia, they’re women.

As with Saudi Arabia, white-ruled South Africa viewed external criticism as a violation of its sovereignty and interference with its internal affairs. And U.S. corporations in South Africa, as with their Saudi Arabian counterparts, pleaded that they had no choice but to defer to the local “culture.”

But something happened in apartheid South Africa.

In 1971, a Philadelphia Baptist preacher named Leon Sullivan joined the board of directors of General Motors, an investor in South Africa. Sullivan used his GM post to apply pressure on the racial apartheid system. He first lobbied GM to pull out of South Africa. Next, Sullivan drafted a set of workplace principles in 1977 that essentially required U.S. companies to practice corporate civil disobedience against apartheid. The first principle on the list: “Non-segregation of the races in all eating, comfort and work facilities.”

Two years later, a dozen top U.S. corporations in South Africa had bought into the Sullivan principles, refusing to tolerate apartheid under their roofs. But that country’s white minority government resisted broader demands to improve the quality of life for black South Africans, and to eliminate laws and customs that impede social, economic and political justice. So Sullivan led a divestment campaign. By 1979, more than 100 businesses had withdrawn from South Africa, other businesses were avoiding new ventures in the country, international banks were refusing to lend there, and universities and pension funds where withdrawing their investments.

The rest, as they say, is history.

The question is whether Americans are as concerned today about U.S. corporate support of gender apartheid in Saudi Arabia as the late Leon Sullivan and a host of others in the anti-apartheid movement were disturbed by the obedience of American businesses to racist apartheid policies in South Africa.

The Feminist Majority Foundation led the public outcry over the Taliban’s human rights abuses against women and girls in Afghanistan. What do they and other opponents of gender discrimination think of the complicity of America’s fast-food joints in Saudi Arabia? Or do American businesses, the golden arches, and American quick service purveyors of hamburgers, fries, pizzas and fried chicken in the Saudi kingdom get a free pass?

Defeating Islamic Terrorism: The Wahhabi Factor – Pages 59-60
Patrick Bascio – 2007 – 256 pages

Saudi Arabia, Mr. Ahmed pointed out, does not allow religious freedom to its Muslim citizens, even to those who are Wahhabi. It practices a rigid form of control on the interpretation of Islam in every sphere of life… He points out that Saudi Arabia is a glaring example of religious apartheid. The religious institutions, judges, religious curriculums, and all religious instructions in the media must conform to the Wahhabi understanding of Islam, adhered to by less than 40% of the population. … Religious apartheid, he said, is the order of the day in Saudi Arabia. Christian and Jewish symbols are banned from public display.

A Brief Profile of Saudi Apartheid Names that are not suitable to the official religious institution are banned. In 1992 a new directive was issued banning any name derived…

Saudi Arabia, the custodian of “true Islam” imposes a raft of restrictions on women … Islam is religious apartheid

Aparthied Saudi Style

National Writers Syndicate – Islamic Apartheid Muslims Only

Islamic Apartheid in Mecca and Medina is a legal, political, and religious segregation enforced by the Shariah compliant country of Saudi Arabia, …

Islamic Apartheid: Mecca and Medina
Alan Kornman
November 23, 2011

According to Saudi Arabian Law it is illegal for any non-Muslim to step foot in the cities of Mecca and Medina. In Medina however, non-Muslims are allowed to enter the Sheraton hotel on the outskirts of town. The Islamists allow a man made exception in their divinely inspired Shariah for the Sheraton Hotel Corporation, yet they make no exception for anyone else.
The equivalent of the Mecca/Medina Apartheid would be the Vatican issuing a decree excluding all non-Catholics/Christians from entering Vatican City, at threat of arrest and imprisonment. The Vatican however, welcomes all people without regard to race, religion, or national origin. Israel also welcomes all faiths, including Muslims, to their most holiest of places, the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem. Conversely, during the period of Jordanian occupation from 1948 to 1967, all Jews were barred entry into the entire Old City and the Wailing Wall was desecrated by the Islamists.
So what it is about non-Muslims that Muslims find so revolting that it is illegal for them to step foot inside the city limits of Islam’s two holiest cities, Mecca and Medina? 
In order to understand the Islamist ideology we must understand what the codified Islamic texts teach at the most basic of levels. Once we connect with what the Islamists believes to be true, we can understand the foundation for the actions of the Islamist.
The only thing that matters now is what the codified Islamic texts say and what most Muslims believe. What you as a non-Muslim think and feel is irrelevant. The Islamist believes they are helping the non-Muslim find peace and the straight path through both violent and non-violent Jihad. If an Islamist is forced to use violence on the non-Muslim it is always the non-Muslims fault for not choosing the Islamic path that is “best” for them.
“The Holy Qur’an is the Divine Word of Allah revealed to the Prophet Muhammad through the Archangel Gabriel to save mankind from darkness unto light.”
(Qur’an 14: 1). 
“Allah sent it as the Book in truth and the balance to judge between right and wrong.”
 (Qur’an 42: 17).
“Since it is the Book of Allah, He Himself guards it from corruption (Qur’an 15: 9) for man to learn wisdom.”
 (Qur’an 12: 2) and, hence, receive the most righteous guidance (Qur’an 17: 9). “Allah enlightens mankind to the truth.” (1)
“Allah the Almighty sent Muhammad (the seal of all the prophets) as His universal Messenger to mankind, giving them glad tidings, and warning them against sin .”
(Qur’an 34: 28).
“Allah sent him to perfect all moral values and to serve as the best example for mankind to follow.”
(Qur’an 33: 21).
Islamists believe Muhammad is the last Prophet on earth and the Qur’an is the final divine revelation for all mankind. The Islamist believes every word of the Qur’an is the exact word of Allah, uncorrupted by man, down to the last letter. As the final divine revelation on earth, the Qur’an, is considered superior to all previously written man made texts like the Old Testament, New Testament, Torah, and U.S. Constitution to name a few. Shariah/Islamic Law is the practical application of Allah’s revelations to Muhammad. The followers of Islam believe the Shariah (Islamic Law) is the perfect divinely inspired legal system and code of life for all mankind.    
Islamic scholars teach that the divinely inspired Qur’an and Shariah outline the specific obligations for all mankind to follow, ushering in an era of peace and coexistence among all men. The Islamist believes, in his heart, he is bringing peace to the world by utilizing violence and terrorism, if necessary, to show the non-Believer the way back to the social, religious, and political governmental system known as Shariah Compliant Islam. Da’wa is the Arabic word for the obligatory proselytizing of Islamic doctrine to the non-Muslim. In the eyes of the Islamist, it is up to the non-Islamic individual or country to decide if they accept Political Islam by the word or the sword. The followers of Islam believe that when they use coercion and violence it is because the non-Muslim left him no choice. The Islamist believes in his soul they are the compassionate peacemakers either through violent or non-violent means. 
In this video Imam Musri blames the United States for radicalizing the Muslim youth . “This radicalization culminated in 9/11”, Musri says.
Musri implies we left our Islamist adversaries no choice but to attack us. 
There is no difference in the “Supremacist Islamic Ideology” of the violent and non violent Jihadist, only a difference of tactics. You can put the Jihadist in an Armani suit but the goals of “peace” through Jihad will always be the same no matter if it is in the USA or Afghanistan. It doesn’t matter if it is the well dressed Americanized stealth Jihadist’s of CAIR, ISNA, and the Muslim Brotherhood here in the United States. The only ideological difference between the violent Jihadist’s and non-violent stealth Jihadist’s is one of tactics. The Muslim advocacy groups in America like ISNA and CAIR will condemn the “act” of terrorism but will “never” condemn the Islamic doctrine that justifies violence to further advance Shariah Compliant Islam in America. 
Understanding how the Islamist views the Kufr or non-believer is one of the most important elements of this equation that is misunderstood by Western culture.
“The Qur'aan uses the word Kufr to denote people who cover up or hide realities. The Qur'an uses this word to identify those who denied Allaah's favors by not accepting His Dominion and Authority. Kufr thus is an antonym for Iman or disbelief in Allaah and a Kaafir is a non-believer. This type of Kufr is called AL-KUFR UL AKBAR or major kufr.”2
Make no mistake, when you hear or read a Muslim calling you a Kufr, Kufar, or Kaafir it is considered a derogatory term by the Muslim aimed directly at you as an individual. The word Kufr or Kaafir is meant to be as offensive as calling someone the “N” word, a kyke, cracker, racist, etc… When a Muslim calls someone a Kufr it is pure bigotry, intolerance, and hatred. Take offense because offense is intended by those who use the vile epithet, Kufr or Kaafir, when describing you. Kufr is modern day hate speech.
The Islamist must take disbelief of Political Islam very seriously because Muhammad and Allah, made disbelief a punishable offense. For an Islamist to publicly state his disbelief in Islam, he then becomes an apostate. Umdat al-Salik Wa-‘Uddat al Nisak  or “Reliance of the Traveller” is a codified Islamic text, with Ijma (consensus), of Shariah / Islamic Law. Ijma means there can be no debate about the legality of what I’m about to tell you. Page 595, o8.1, of Reliance of the Traveller states,
“When a person who has reached puberty, and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.”
o8.0 of Reliance states,
“Leaving Islam is the ugliest form of unbelief (Kufr) and the worst.”
Watch this video taken at the 2011 Dearborn Arab International Festival (WARNING – contains bad language and scenes of intimidation).
You will see many different street scenes of how the Dearborn 46% Muslim majority feel and act during their most emotional and unscripted moments. Many say that Dearborn, MI is an “emerging No Go Zone” and this explosive video validates that claim.
Muslim on Muslim violence began immediately after Muhammad died. Scores of Arab Muslim tribes left Islam after Muhammad’s death and those that remained loyal to Muhammad’s successor Caliph Abu Bakr considered this a political rebellion. These Muslim apostates were graciously given the opportunity to submit to Islam or die. These bloody wars became known as the Ridda or Apostasy Wars lasting from 632-633 AD. The practice of death to apostates is considered the worst of offenses to Allah. Muslims here in the United States who leave Islam are persecuted and often killed by their fellow Muslims. Visit the website, Former Muslims United, to hear their heroic stories. 
If a Muslim deserves to be killed by his fellow Muslims for leaving Islam, it is factual to conclude the apostate is viewed by the Islamist as subhuman and worthy of death according Islamic Shariah doctrine. 
We learned earlier a devout Muslim believes the entire Qur’an is the word of Allah and infallible down to the last letter. For a Muslim to challenge the word of Allah is blasphemy and carries severe punishment in Shariah Islam. Therefore, most all Muslims keep their mouths shut if their voice strays from the Shariah Compliant line.
Islamist superiority over all non-Muslims comes straight from Qur’an verse 3:110,
“Ye are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, and believing in Allah. If only the People of the Book had faith, it would be best for them: among them are some who have faith, but most of them are perverted transgressors.”
The arrogance and superiority dripping from this Qur’an verse offends me. I am offended the devout Muslim believes in this Allah given Qur’an verse that infers most all non-Muslims are second class citizens, perverted transgressors, and sub human. I am offended for all the Muslims who choose to leave Political Islam and risk death by their fellow Islamists’ hands. I am offended that Muslim Advocacy Groups in America try to attack and silence anyone with vile epithets and frivolous lawsuits who publicly criticize Shariah Compliant Islam. I am offended that Muslims make up only 1% of the U.S. population but are demanding Shariah Compliant accommodations on the other 99% who are non-Muslim. Our founding fathers called this practice the tyranny of the minority. I see the signs that American Muslim Advocacy Groups like the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), and The Muslim Student Association (MSA) want to change American culture rather than assimilate. I am offended the Islamists see themselves as culturally superior to our man made laws and refuse to submit to Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution which states, “United States Law shall be the Supreme Law of the Land.”  
It is this Muhammad inspired Islamist cultural superiority that makes Apartheid possible in Mecca and Medina. I am offended that every Mosque and Islamic Center in America supports these Apartheid practices by promoting trips to Mecca and Medina knowing the other 99% of their fellow American’s would be arrested or not allowed admittance for the crime of being non-Muslim.
I am outraged Eric Holder’s Department of Justice filed a civil rights lawsuit in December of 2010 against a Chicago School on behalf of, Safoorah Khan. Khan requested three weeks off in the middle of the school year to attend the pilgrimage to Mecca. Ms. Khan’s Shariah compliant superiority over manmade rules and contracts is in accordance with Islamic doctrine. When the non-Islamic government school district failed to submit to Ms. Khan’s extraordinary demands and special rights, she viewed herself as the victim. Khan filed a discrimination lawsuit costing our government hundreds of thousands of dollars. Ms. Khan is not the victim but a player in the game of Legal Jihad and you should be angered, outraged, and offended by Ms. Khan’s and The Department of Justice’s pro-Shariah Compliant position over our manmade laws.
The next step in the evolution of Shariah Compliance in America will be the obscene demand that Shariah Family Courts become a legal and parallel court system in America, just as they are in Europe. Now why in the world would an American Muslim wish to challenge Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution which states that, “…United States Law Shall be the Law of the Land…”?
Now you know the answer: The followers of the Qur’an, Muhammad, and the Shariah Compliant Islam believe their divinely inspired texts are superior to our man made laws such as the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights. 
You must understand the devout Islamist believes they are helping us to shed our corrupted man made laws by forcefully introducing Shariah Compliant Islam into our unique Representative Republic form of Government. The devout Islamist believes in their heart they are leading us as a country down the “right path” as transmitted by Allah to his last and final messenger Muhammad. They believe that Shariah Compliant Islam is the right path for all mankind. 
The Muslim Advocacy Groups and The Muslim Brotherhood are achieving their strategic military objective of Shariah Family Courts in America one lawsuit at a time mixed in with terrorism to instill fear into the hearts of non-believers. 
Motto of the Muslim Brotherhood in America:
– Allah is our objective.
– The Prophet is our leader.
– Qur'an is our law.
– Jihad is our way.
– Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.
God Bless America and God Bless our Troops
As Vito, my Radio Jihad cohost,  says, “Mama Mia, No Shariah!”
Family Security Matters Contributing Editor Alan Kornman is Regional Coordinator for The United West – Uniting Western Civilization for Freedom and Liberty. He can be contacted at:

Islam and the State of the Union – Andrew C. McCarthy – National …24 Jan 2011 … The latter, in fact, explains not only Saudi Arabia’s official policy of apartheid in Islam’s major cities…

Hypocrisy on Parade [The Huffington Post]

Posted: 06/28/11 04:36 PM ET

In an interview in London, The Artist Formerly Known as Prince has eased human rights concerns about religious authoritarianism in the Middle East by explaining: “It’s fun being in Islamic countries, to know there’s only one religion. There’s order. You wear a burqa. There’s no choice. People are happy with that.”

Less clear is whether Prince also approves of the Kingdom’s systematic discrimination against Christians and Jews, treated either as second-class aliens with no right to worship or banned from stepping foot on Saudi soil altogether.

Now, Delta Airlines has added Saudi Arabian Airlines to its SkyTeam Alliance of corporate partners. By extension, this puts Delta Airlines in a position to facilitate the Saudi ban on Jews, holders of Israeli passports and anyone who even has an Israeli stamp indicating a visit to Israel.

Delta, of course, denies all discrimination while kowtowing to discriminatory Saudi regulations. No one forced Delta to choose such an international partner with a track record of religious apartheid. But Delta’s spokesmen are right about one thing: Ultimate responsibility lies with governments, not companies. Our government’s response? In a break with the past, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has condemned the Saudi refusal to issue driver’s licenses to women, but in keeping with previous U.S. policy has apparently been silent over the Kingdom’s embedded rules of religious apartheid.

It’s this context of Saudi apartheid that renders so blatant the hypocrisy and double standards of so many of the world’s gatekeepers of civil society. NGOs have zero tolerance regarding Israel naval blockade against Gaza arms smuggling. The Second International “Gaza Freedom” Flotilla, including the American ship, “The Audacity of Hope,” is enroute to Gaza. Their goal: breaking Israel’s sea blockade of Hamastan, thus depriving Israel of the right of every U.N. member state to defend itself against threats to its sovereignty and survival. In the case of Gaza, the Jewish state is confronted with the growing threat posed by a Hamas government determined to re-arming with new Iranian missiles and enhancing their capacity to wreak mass destruction on the Jewish state.

Let there be no mistake about it: “The Audacity of Hope” is a ship of fools, dupes and agents provocateur. The New York Times, no friend of the Jewish state, is forced to admit that the reality on the ground in Gaza is not “a humanitarian crisis” caused by “the Israeli blockade,” but instead a building boom and unprecedented prosperity: “Two luxury hotels are opening in Gaza this month. Thousands of new cars are plying the roads. A second shopping mall — with escalators imported from Israel — will open next month. Hundreds of homes and two dozen schools are about to go up. A Hamas-run farm where Jewish settlements once stood is producing enough fruit that Israeli imports are tapering off,” The Times reported.

So it seems the only place where the Arab Spring appears to have produced better economic times is precisely the place where Israel is accused of brutally stifling it.

Now Turkey, the prime mover behind the first Gaza Flotilla manned by “peace crusaders” armed with pick axes and knives, has backed off from participation in the brazen Flotilla II, given Ankara’s angst over the bloody Syrian regime’s behavior around Turkey’s borders. Turkey’s leader is incensed that Bashir Assad’s desperate attempts to suppress Syrian dissenters have caused a specter of Syrian refugees suddenly pouring over the border seeking Ankara’s protection.

But nothing — not improved conditions in Gaza; not Assad’s thuggery and murder of its own citizens; not the duplicity of Iranian Revolutionary Guards supplied by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to abet Assad’s butchery — is enough to change fundamentally the master narrative embedded among so many elite among human rights NGOs, media and church “activists.” Israel can do no right and its enemies, who are also the enemies of human rights, can do no wrong.

As a result, it’s a safe bet that the 50+ international media outlets embedded in the Gaza II Flotilla will most benefit not the Palestinians but two tyrants: Gaddafi and Assad. They’ll be able to breathe a temporary sigh of relief. With any luck, the “Audacity of Hope’ will yield enough dramatic footage and sound bytes to knock the tyrants of the Arab Spring off the top of the news on Al Jazeera for a couple of days.

This essay was co-authored by Dr. Harold Brackman.

Religious Apartheid in Saudi Arabia

November 11, 2002
by Center for Religious Freedom


How we’ve won the war in Iraq – Times Online‎

Sep 30, 2007


Three and a half years after the start of the insurgency, most of the big questions in Iraq have been resolved. The country is whole. It has embraced the ballot box. It has created a fair and popular constitution. It has avoided all-out civil war. It has not been taken over by Iran. It has put an end to Kurdish and marsh Arab genocide and anti Shi’ite apartheid. It has rejected mass revenge against the Sunnis.


Is this Apartheid in Bahrain? – Feb 22, 2011 … Some scattered thoughts — and fears — about Bahrain and the dangers it faces.

How About a Bahraini Apartheid Week?
February 22, 2011 12:36 by Pesach Benson
Can you imagine the outrage if Israel treated Israeli Arabs and Palestinians the same way Kristof describes Bahrain’s Sunni elite treating Shias?

There’s a fear of the rabble, a distrust of full democracy, a sense of entitlement. Apartheid isn’t exactly the right metaphor, because there isn’t formal separation (although neighborhoods are often either Sunni or Shia), and people routinely have very close friends of the other sect. But how can a system when 70 percent of the population is not eligible for the army be considered fair? How can a system in which the leading cabinet positions are filled by one family be considered fair?

The government talks about “unity” and complains that the opposition is encouraging sectarianism. Please! An American friend was on the roundabout Thursday morning when police attacked. They caught him but when they saw he was American they were friendly and said they were hunting Shia only. My friend said the experience left him feeling icy, as if they were hunting rats. And several people I talked to who were there said that the police used anti-Shia epithets and curses as they were beating prisoners.

Bahrain: The Missing ‘A’ Word

In all the coverage of the freedom protests in Bahrain, a certain word beginning with the letter ‘A’ has been strikingly absent.

I don’t mean ‘autocratic.’ Nor ‘authoritarian.’ Both of those have been invoked, and rightly so.

I refer to the word ‘apartheid.’ The Afrikaner term for ‘separateness,’ apartheid prevailed in South Africa from 1948 until 1993, when that country was under white minority rule.

While apartheid as a system was snuffed out in South Africa, it has survived as a descriptor that is deployed, in the main, by the bitterest detractors of Israel, but is arguably more relevant in the case of another Middle Eastern country: Bahrain.

It’s always worth recalling what the original model of apartheid involved. In South Africa, 90 percent of the population was composed of non-whites (blacks in the main, but also mixed race and Indian communities) who were disenfranchised and deprived of fundamental human and civil rights.

Through such measures as the Group Areas Act (1950), the Bantu Education Act (1953), the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act (1953), the Suppression of Communism Act (1950), and the Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act (1949), the apartheid regime micromanaged the lives of its subjects on the basis of their skin color. Under apartheid, it was the law that determined where blacks could live, what they could study, which seats they could occupy on public transport, what they could say or write publicly, with whom they could share a bed or marry.

It was this reliance on law that made apartheid South Africa peculiar. Discrimination is a feature of most countries, but very few enshrine it within a legal framework.

In Bahrain, where 70 per cent of the population is Shi’a, and power and wealth are concentrated in the hands of the Sunni minority, the constitution speaks of equality — formally, then, it’s very different to apartheid South Africa. Yet when it comes to actual practice, the similarities are striking, as this report from the Bahrain Center for Human Rights (BCHR) makes painfully clear.

Residency rights, for example, are at least partly determined by ethnic origin. The report discusses “one of Bahrain’s largest district, Riffa,” which occupies “more than 40 percent of Bahrain land, in which a majority of the members of ruling family reside.” Shi’a and some Persian origin Sunnis, the report continues, are prohibited from living there. A Reuters report last October highlighted a related problem: the 53,000 Shi’a who have been denied government housing because of their origin, some for as long as 20 years.

It’s a similar story in the labor market. “Employment in government bureaus does not follow a clear and specific standard, but is governed by family and sectarian connections,” the BCHR report says, pointing out that the Shi’a majority occupies, at most, 18 percent of the top jobs in government. When it comes to unemployment, 95 percent of those without jobs are Shi’a.

Do these facts about discrimination in Bahrain add up to apartheid? A sober analysis based on the understanding of apartheid as a system, rather than a pejorative term to be thrown at those you don’t like, would conclude that the overlap is hardly precise. At the same time, there is no arguing against the claim that Bahrain is a society where inequality is ethnically rooted, and then buttressed by the denial of civic and political freedoms.

Bahrain is not the only Arab country where minorities rule over majorities: Syria is another, as was Iraq under Saddam Hussein. In none of these cases has the word “apartheid” ever been uttered. Those South Africans, such as Bishop Desmond Tutu, who have eagerly franchised the word in the case of Israel have been absolutely silent when it comes to Arab parallels. And believe me, it’s not because they are worried about social scientific rigor.

This lack of a consistent, trained spotlight on countries like Bahrain, and the absence of a chorus of luminaries ready to denounce each of its repressive actions in colorful, emotive language, is one reason why the rest of the world has only now discovered that there has long been a thirst for freedom in the Middle East. If that heralds a final break with the platitudes and double standards that characterize the voguish, “anti-imperialist” discourse about the region, so much the better.


The Kurdish political struggles in Iran, Iraq, and Turkey: a critical analysis – A. Manafy – University Press of America, 2005 (ISBN 0761830030, 9780761830030) – 172 pages

Page 99

The Kurdish deprivation of their own culture, language, and tradition is incompatible with democratic norms. It reflects an apartheid system that victimizes minorities like Armenians, Kurds, and Shij Muslems. The Turkish government systematically failed to learn from the historical evidence. Forced assimilation is not a solution for national solidarity, and the continued repression of the Kurds cannot indefinitely secure Turkish unity.

Page 149

It is not a “mass line,” but a feudal line devised by the Kurdish people’s enemies to inhibit the Kurdish liberation …villages do not have drinking piped water, roads, or electricity. Deprivation in southeast Turkey is the critical variable that triggered the PKK’s armed struggle to liberate the Kurds from the discriminatory apartheid situation.

Crimes of war: what the public should know – Page 39 – Roy Gutman, David Rieff, Anthony Gary Dworkin – W. W. Norton & Company, 2007 – 447 pages
Groups such as the Kurds, the Tamils, the South Sudanese, or other indigenous peoples do suffer systematic discrimination that might well meet the definition of apartheid, even if those practices lack all …

The Kurdish conflict in Turkey: obstacles and chances for peace and democracy  – Page 159 – Ferhad Ibrahim, Gülistan Gürbey – Palgrave Macmillan, 2000 – 208 pages
Norman Paech INTERNATIONAL LAW AND THE KURDISH STRUGGLE FOR FREEDOM Without a doubt, the fight of the Kurdish people for … This is similar to how the white Apartheid government took action against the members of the African National …

Turkey’s Kurds: A theoretical analysis of the PKK and Abdullah Ocalan – Page 71 – Ali Kemal Ozcan – [Routledge]
… Beşikçi makes a comparison between South Africa and Turkey: In South Africa, the Apartheid policy..

Underappreciated At Home, Kurdish Filmmakers Struggle For Identity
RadioFreeEurope/RadioLiberty – Oct 28, 2009

By Nikola Krastev


Bahman Ghobadi from Iran, whose film “No One Knows About Persian Cats” premiered at the New York festival, is among the better-known contemporary Kurdish filmmakers.

Also offering a film in New York was Hiner Saleem, an Iraqi-Kurdish cinematographer based in France. Saleem’s latest comedy, “Vodka Lemon,” is a gentle love story about an ex-army officer and a barmaid set in a Kurdish village in Armenia that dismisses the notion that there is a common underlying theme for all Kurdish filmmakers.

“We can live in the same city or the same village but think differently or have different sensibilities,” Saleem said. “Unfortunately today for Kurds in Turkey, in Syria, in Iran, it is very hard to make movies. It’s very difficult to work because there is an apartheid against Kurdish [people], there is no equality, there are no human rights, there is no freedom. But some very courageous, brave Kurdish girls and boys [are] making movies in very hard conditions.”

Implimentation of the Helsinki Accords Criminalizing Parliamentary Speech in Turkey
Briefing by the International Human Rights Law Group

May 1994

Before the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe

Washington DC


the problem in Turkey is the Constitution is against the Kurds and the apartheid constitution is very similar to it. As long as that continues, there will be PKK, there..


[21 March 2011]

The application of Kurdish politicians Aysel Tuğluk and Ahmet Türk to restore their status as members of parliament was dismissed. Both politicians were subjected to a five-year political ban after the ban of the pro-Kurdish Democratic Society Party in 2009. The Presidency of the Turkey Grand National Assembly (TBMM) rejected the applications of Kurdish politicians Ahmet Türk and Aysel Tuğluk related to restoring their status as members of parliament. Following amendments enforced after the referendum on the constitutional reform package in 2010, the Peace and Democracy Party (BDP) had applied to parliament for restoring Türk’s and Tuğluk’s status as MPs. Upon the TBMM’s rejection of the application, lawyer Öztürk Türkdoğan brought the issue before the Constitutional Court on behalf of Türk and Tuğluk. On Thursday (17 March), the High Court dismissed the request “by majority vote”.

Foreign assistance legislation for fiscal year 1994: Part 2; Part 2 – Page 396 – 1993

Turkey’s violations of law are extensively discussed and documented in my article,
“Cyprus and the Rule of Law ”

No one in the State and Defense Departments wants to talk of these violations of law
by Turkey which are more extensive than the violations of law by Iraq in its invasion of
Kuwait. The double standard for Turkey must end.

The Cyprus issue is one of aggression and land grab through brute force by Turkey in
violation of the UN Charter and international law It is not a question of minority rights The
substantive proposals made over the years by the Greek Cypriots encompass the language ofthe
Universal Declarations of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights
Protection of minority rights can also be aided by allowing for appeal to outside institutions such
as the United Nations, the European Commission on Human Rights and the International Court of
Justice at the Hague.

Turkey and Denktash have used this issue to create an excuse for their apartheid and partition policies.

11. Turkey’s human rights violations against its own citizens generally and in particular against its 12 million Kurdish citizens…

Full text of “Foreign assistance legislation for fiscal year 1994 : hearings and markup before the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, One Hundred Third Congress, first session

Op-Ed on “Turkey’s Aggression, War Crimes, Ethnic Cleansing and Apartheid Policy in Cyprus…”
Washington, DC—The following Op-Ed appeared in the National Herald, the Hellenic Voice, the Greek News and the Hellenic News of America.

End the illegal Turkish occupation

The 3Rs: 1 Remove all Turkish troops from Cyprus 2 Repatriate all colonists 3 Return all refugees to their homes without preconditions, restrictions or discrimination

In 1974 Turkey invaded Cyprus, illegally dividing the country and committing war crimes and mass human rights abuses. Hundreds of thousands of Greek Cypriots were ethnically cleansed by the Turkish army.

Turkey continues to violate international law and United Nations resolutions that demand the withdrawal of the Turkish army and the right to return for Greek Cypriot refugees.

We are protesting because Turkey still maintains its illegal apartheid regime that racially discrimates against Greek Cypriots by preventing them from returning to their homes and lands.

The Greek Cypriots are the legal owners of 82 percent of land in the occupied north and we want to return. We will never give up our properties to those who seek to profit from their theft and illegal purchase.

Is it right that Turkey, which aspires to join the European Union still maintains military occupation of one third of the Republic of Cyprus, a country which is a full member of the EU?

The human rights of the Cypriots must be restored, so that we may live in a truly reunited Cyprus with the full rights enjoyed by all other EU citizens.

While Turkey continues violating the human rights of EU citizens and destroying the European culture of occupied Cyprus, it is unacceptable that it is allowed to proceed with EU accession negotiations.

We call on your support to put pressure on EU governments to help end the illegal occupation of Cyprus and to end Turkish apartheid in Cyprus.

The 3Rs: 1 Removal of all Turkish troops from Cyprus 2 Repatriation of all colonists 3 Return of all refugees to their homes without preconditions, restrictions or discrimination

The Cyprus Problem Cyprus maintained that Turkey’s policy was aimed at dividing Cyprus along racial lines. Subsequently, 200,000 Greek-Cypriot swere displaced. […] In addition, in August and September 2001, the international community had a meeting for the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, declared its universal recognition of “the right of refugees to return voluntarily to their homes and properties in dignity and safety, and urge[d] all States to facilitate such return.”

Official report of debates: Part 4 – Page 743 Council of Europe. Parliamentary Assembly – 1990
A viable and just Cyprus settlement cannot be based on a situation of apartheid, under which Cypriots are forcibly segregated on the grounds that Muslims and Christians, people of Turkish origin and people of Greek origin, cannot live together. Such segregation not only contradicts fundamentally Turkey’s own policy of integration with the European Community, but also constitutes a recipe for suspicion, resentment and conflict.

The Middle East, abstracts and index: Part 4 Library Information and Research Service – Northumberland Press, 2005 – Page 623
The plan would allow settlement of Greeks in the Turkish zone, but creates an apartheid system of careful quotas of Greek resettlement to maintain a Turkish Muslim majority in the north and links the desire of Greek Cypriots to Btum to their home with Turkey accession into EU: up to 18% of the population could be Greek under the plan.. … Therefore it is no surprise either that the leaders in the Uthmani Khilafah like Sultan Abdul Hameed valued Islam,

Turkish human rights violations in Turkey and Cyprus (2007)
Ismail Cem, Turkey’s Foreign Minister recently complained that the European Union had offered Turkey only a “third class ticket” on the train of accession to the European Union. Others would say that Turkey was extremely fortunate to have even been considered for membership given its appalling tradition of human rights abuses.

For the past two hundred years, Turkey has achieved what is undoubtedly one of the worst human rights records in the world. The Turks have ethnically cleansed or otherwise mistreated ethnic minorities within Turkey and the peoples of neighbouring countries.

These include the Armenians, Bulgarians, Cypriots, Greeks, Kurds, Romanians and the Serbs. Turkey has the unenviable record of having conducted the first genocide of the 20th century when from 1915 to 1918 one and a half million indigenous Armenians were annihilated.

Lately, the Turks have turned their attention to those of their own people who have the courage to speak out against human rights abuses in Turkey.

Killings, disappearances and torture of lawyers, journalists, trade unionists, intellectuals and others remain well documented and are frighteningly commonplace in modern day Turkey.

Amnesty international recently reported that Turkey is the 5th worst country in the world for torture in jails, whilst the US State Department reports that the human rights situation in Turkey continues to deteriorate despite the promises of the Turkish government. In its annual report to Congress on human rights the Clinton administration stated that Turkish security forces committed “serious human rights abuses” during 1997.

Today, Turkey wages a dirty war against the Kurds who are fighting for recognition of their identity, and the right to express their language and culture. Almost 30,000 Kurds, government forces and civilians have been sacrificed. Three million Kurds are now refugees, and 3,000 Kurdish villages have been razed to the ground by Turkish troops.

This policy of human rights violations and ethnic cleansing is just as evident in the occupied north of Cyprus.

Turkey invaded the Republic of Cyprus in 1974 under the most spurious circumstances, causing death, rape, torture and forced displacement of persons, acts which are well documented by the European Court of Human Rights.

Turkey has created an illegal apartheid regime in the occupied area forcibly separating the Greek Cypriots from the Turkish Cypriots, violating a fundamental tenet of the European Union – the principle of free movement.

The few remaining Greek Cypriots enclaved in the occupied north are subject to continuous attack, harassment and intimidation, relying on United Nations protection and hand-outs in order to survive. They are also denied the right to secondary education, in violation of international law and the UN Charter on Human Rights.

No one can treat the hapless Mr Cem or Turkey itself with any credibility for so long as Turkey persists with her atrocious tradition of human rights violations. Sadly history teaches us that Turkey’s policy on human rights has not and is unlikely to change.

Lobby for Cyprus urges the European Union leaders not to pursue a policy of appeasement with Turkey.

Human rights violations in Turkey 1994 1995 1996 1997 (Jan-Nov) Assassinations 292 89 78 103 Civilians killed by military 458 230 119 133 Disappearances 328 220 194 62 Deaths in custody 298 122 190 97 Killed in clashes 5,000 3,894 2,859 2,323 Torture cases 1,000 1,412 348 343 Number arrested 14,473 14,473 20,434 24,999 Number imprisoned 1,209 2,101 2,071 1,197 Journalists arrested ? 461 421 284 Bombed villages 191 184 109 119 Villages burnt down/evacuated 1,500 243 63 15

Human rights violations by Turkey following its invasion of the Republic of Cyprus In 1974 200,000 Greek Cypriots were forcibly removed from their homes 6,000 civilians and non combatants were murdered or tortured to death 1,000 women and girls were raped 1,619 missing persons are still unaccounted for by Turkey. The Red Cross documented that many were sent as prisoners of war to Turkey 100,000 colonists were transplanted to the occupied area to alter the demographic composition of the island more than 40,000 Turkish Cypriots have fled the occupied area unable to coexist with the colonists over 800 churches have been looted, destroyed or turned into stables Turkey continues to ignore more than 90 United Nations and Security Council resolutions calling for the respect of human rights in Cyprus and the restoration of the sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus.

European Armenian Federation Urges EU to Denounce Turkey’s Anti Armenian Apartheid Policies

BRUSSELS (CDCA)–Media sources revealed that the soon-to-be-released 2003 European Commission report on Turkey’s accession to the EU–documen’s a growing gap between Turkey’s stated reform efforts and the actual implementation of such reforms–reported the European Armenian Federation for Justice and Democracy (formerly ANC-Europe). The report–however–appears to rationalize this action–faulting local administrators and judicial officials as opposed to top government officials.

“The European Commission should be well aware that blaming low level officials for continued human rights abuses and violations is the Turkish Government’s usual alibi in its effort to clean up its image with international organization,” stated European Armenian Federation Chairperson Hilda Tchoboian.

“In essence–this document’s tone serves to encourage the Turkish authorities in their failure to enact real reforms rather than warn them of the consequences of such action.”

Early news items on the EC report–set to be unveiled on November 5–reveal that while the report cites a number of human rights violations related to freedom of speech–rights of minorities–torture–and the lack of constitutional law–it does not highlight the lack of political will to bring about positive change. Further–while the report apparently discusses the hardships of most non-Muslim minorities in Turkey–it refrains from focusing on the ongoing policy of oppression against the Armenian minority in that country.

“In addition to the religious discrimination that all Christian minorities suffer in Turkey–the Armenia’s–who are descendants of the victims of the genocide committed by the Turkish government–are subjected to a distinct policy of racism–an anti-Armenian policy of apartheid,” added Tchoboian.

“Their collective rights continue to be violated through threats of confiscation and expropriation of school facilities–churches and community institutions and daily attacks on their freedom of speech–opinion and conscience. Here again–despite the promise of reforms–the government has erected insurmountable obstacles and attributed them to the poor application of the law by “local officials.”

Tchoboian cited a directive issued by Turkish Minister of Education Huseyin Celik earlier this year as a flagrant example of the ongoing oppression of the Armenian minority. The April 14–2003–decree mandated that all schools in Turkey–including Armenian schools–sponsor essay competitions and events denying the Armenian Genocide. Turkish teachers who questioned the circular have been arrested and dismissed from their jobs. “This policy was orchestrated by top government leaders–not by local officials,” remarked Tchoboian.

On July 24–a coalition of more than 200 European associations and organizations urged the EU Presidency–the European Commission and the European Parliament–to suspend the financial aid given to the Turkish educational system through various European programs in light of this policy of genocide denial.

“Three months after public objections registered by members of European civil society–and calls by 360 Turkish intellectuals urging the Minister to rescind the decree–we see that the absence of firm action by European authorities serves to encourage the Turkish authorities to extend with impunity their policy and practices of denial to the university level. The European Parliament’s concerns regarding this issue–as expressed in the Oostlander report–should trigger a response by European executive authorities against Turkey’s racist decrees,” stated the Chairperson of the European Armenian Federation.

“We remind the EU Presidency–the European Commission and the European Parliament that the Reinforced Pre-Accession Strategy vis–vis Turkey is dependent on that country’s fundamental respect for human rights. As such–European subsidies given to a country guilty of blatant human rights double-talk must be reconsidered,” concluded Mrs. Tchoboian.

In Turkey non Muslims are listed as Foreigners

Akcam: Genocide Recognition is about Justice, Not Freedom of Thought – Armenian Weekly

Posted by Taner Akcam on January 25, 2012

This is something that the West needs to realize. It just isn’t possible to change Turkey’s position regarding the subject of 1915 based solely on internal democratic opposition. Turkish democratic and civil society activists don’t possess that kind of strength. The assassination of Hrant Dink is evidence of this weakness. Today, there’s a very genuine activist movement that goes by the name “Friends of Hrant” that has gained significant public support in Turkey, yet Hrant’s real murderers still roam the country freely.

Those countries that condone and enable Turkey’s politics of denial for their own economic, political, and strategic advantage should understand one thing: “Denial” is a structure. To understand why Turkey continues to deny what happened in 1915, you should compare it with the racist regime of South Africa. The institutions, system, and mindset of apartheid were established upon racial differences, and the denial of genocide is similar. By denying what happened in 1915, Turkey reproduces the institutions, social relations, and mindset that created 1915.

Genocide denial goes beyond the defense of a former regime whose institutions and mindset were realized as genocide in the past. Denial also fuels a politics of continuing aggression, both inside and outside Turkey, against anyone who opposes the denialist mentality.
This is why Hrant Dink’s actual murderers are still at large. This is why attacks are organized against Armenians and their memorials in Europe…

What should be clear to everyone is this: In Turkey, genocide denial is an industry. It is also a state policy of primary importance. The National Security Council, Turkey’s highest constitutional authority, established in 2001 a Coordinating Committee for the Fight Against Baseless Claims of Genocide. All of the important ministries, including the Armed Forces, are represented on this committee, which is chaired by the vice prime minister. I repeat: Denying the genocide is one of the most important national policies of the Turkish state. You need to realize that you aren’t just confronting a simple “denial,” but you’re up against a “denialist regime.”

As long as Turkey continues this state policy of genocide denial through its institutions, relations, and mentality, Ankara will be sensitive to external pressure. In fact, this pressure should be increased. What happened in Libya and Syria needs to happen in Turkey also, with regard to genocide denial, even if the content and scope of the pressure are different.

If the West is serious about democracy in the Middle East, it cannot build democracy by supporting a denialist regime. Historical denial, both as institution and mindset, is probably the greatest stumbling block to peace and democracy in the Middle East. Why do Christians, Kurds, and Arabs in Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq feel intimidated by Turkey? Why aren’t they keen on Turkey’s intervention for democracy and human rights? Because they see, in today’s denialist regime of Turkey, the Unionists’ mentality that committed crimes against them in the past.

The South African regime didn’t collapse from internal pressure alone. The support of international public opinion was also very important. As long as the West allows Turkey’s denialist politics to continue, genocide denial will go on.

We are faced with the huge issue of how to prevent mass murders and genocides in today’s global community. To that end, the space for genocide denial in the international arena must be narrowed and ultimately eliminated. Turkey’s denial policy should be reconsidered within this perspective of prevention of genocide in the global world.

Islam Today: Alevis in Turkey – Victims of Islamist Discrimination …May 22, 2009 … Alevis are a religious, sub-ethnic and cultural community in Turkey, numbering in the tens of millions. Alevism is considered one of the …—victims-of-islamist-discrimination


Alevi Apartheid in Turkey (Academic Research Results)

Today Vatan Daily one of the most popular newspapers of Turkey published a summary of an academic research about Alevi Apartheid.


Copts in Egypt: a Christian minority under siege : papers presented at the First International Coptic Symposium, Zurich, September 23-25, 2004 – Page 95 – Martyn Thomas, Adly A. Youssef – Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2006 – 192 pages
Keith Roderick Besieged Christians under Islamic Rule… Apartheid, injustice, oppression…

Victims of the Revolution
Mubarak’s downfall has proved a mixed blessing for Egypt’s persecuted Christian minority.
Article | 31 May 2011 – 1:31pm | By Menelaos Agaloglou
The treatment of Copts – Egypt’s Christian minority – was described in 2010 as “akin to apartheid”.

Egypt’s New Rulers Must Protect the Copts, Not Persecute Them
By Elias Bejjani
Added: May 13th, 2011
Were we all fantasizing, naive and foolish when the recent peaceful and civilized Egyptian revolution led by the new youthful generation made us and the whole world believe that its prime objectives were stability, freedom, justice, peace, equality, democracy, openness, respect for human rights, a dignified life with no oppression, education about hatred and discrimination and a secular constitution that secures equality in rights and obligations for all Egyptians citizens of all religions?
The first and major failure and setback committed by the “Higher Military Egyptian Council” members was in their stubborn clinging to Article Two in the country’s constitution that legalizes discrimination and apartheid. It states verbatim: “Islam is the religion of the state, Arabic is its official language, and the principles of Islamic Sharia are the main source of legislation”.

Posted on Jun 5, 2007
The tragedy in Bimha takes Egypt another step backward into religious apartheid [and] presents Egyptians with yet another precedent which demonstrates that Copts can be terrorized, robbed and killed with impunity.”

Apartheid Of The 21st Century |

united copts .org – Please stop religious apartheid in Egypt

Wednesday, 05 October 2011

Please stop religious apartheid in Egypt
Shame on you Egyptian army and police Beating up viciously Christians peacefully protesting the burning of church in Edfu
Why you do not arrest the mob who burnt the church? Why do not you arrest the mosque imam who incited and urged the burning of church?
Is Egypt becoming a State who sponsor of terrorism?


BBC News | EDUCATION | ‘Apartheid’ row over Islamic school

Muslim apartheid: Getting behind the veil By Peter C. Glover … by The British Islamic Human Rights Commission

Bethlehem Christians Break Silence on Muslim Oppression – IRIS Blog Jan 26, 2011

After many years… the truth has been revealed. Christians are fleeing every Muslim-majority territory because of the apartheid discrimination encouraged by Muslim sharia law. Land theft works because the testimony of non-Muslims is weighed less in every sharia court in the world.

Against Islamic Apartheid
By Mark D. Tooley | Christian Post Contributor
When others in his church and nation are often blinded by multiculturalism and rigid political correctness, the Church of England’s ethnically Pakistani Bishop of Rochester often speaks boldly. His recent column in The Daily Telegraph warning against encroaching self-segregation and even the growing practice of Islamic Sharia law within British Islamic communities has aroused the ire of some Muslim clerics in Britain.
“There has been a worldwide resurgence of the ideology of Islamic extremism,” Nazir-Ali wrote. “One of the results of this has been to further alienate the young from the nation in which they were growing up and also to turn already separate communities into ‘no-go’ areas where adherence to this ideology has become a mark of acceptability.”

The Islamization of some parts of British cities has happened thanks to high immigration from Muslim countries, low birth-rates among the native British, and the growing secularization of once Christian British society, where only about ten percent or less are Christian church-goers. As Nazir-Ali noted: “In fewer than 50 years, Britain has changed from being a society with an acknowledged Christian basis to one which is increasingly described by politicians and the media as ‘multifaith.'”

Britain has lost “confidence in the Christian vision which underlay most of the achievements and values of [its] culture, Nazir-Ali regretted. And the nation has sought to accommodate its Muslim immigrants with a multiculturalism that encouraged “separate communities” that had “minimum need for building healthy relationships with the majority.” The bishops warnings drew reactions from some Muslim leaders.

The Ramadhan Foundation’s Mohammed Shafiq responded by telling the Daily Telegraph: “Mr Nazir-Ali is promoting hatred towards Muslims and should resign.” Muslim Council of Britain Assistant Secretary General Inayat Bunglawala was similarly pained: “Bishop Nazir-Ali appears to be exercised by what he perceives as the decline in the influence of Christianity upon this country, but trying to frantically scaremonger about Islam and Muslims seems to us to be a rather unethical way of trying to reverse this.” Bunglawala preferred to fault Islamist extremism on the British and U.S. governments: “He talks about the rise of ‘Islamic extremism’ but fails to mention how some of the policies of our government and especially that of the United States in the Middle East over several decades now has clearly contributed to this phenomenon.”

But Nazir-Ali warned that in some of Britain’s self-segregated Islamic communities, “Those of a different faith or race may find it difficult to live or work there because of hostility to them and even the risk of violence.” He described some efforts to impose an “Islamic” character on neighborhoods by electronically amplified broadcasting of Islamic calls to prayer. The bishop wondered whether non-Muslims “wish to be told the creed of a particular faith five times a day on the loudspeaker.”

The bishop also noted efforts to insert some aspects of Islamic Sharia law into Britain’s civil law, starting with Sharia-compliant banking. Growing Islamization, combined with secularization from other quarters, is helping to squeeze traditional Christian symbols out of Britain’s public sphere, Nazir-Ali complained. The “Christian character of the nation’s laws, values, customs and culture” are being diminished” and in the end, “nothing will be left but the smile of the Cheshire Cat.”

Nazir-Ali observed that only the growth of Christian churches among African and East European immigrant communities has prevented the extinguishing of active Christianity in many British cities. Although he did not mention it, Britain’s largest church is now a congregation of Nigerian Anglicans. Meanwhile, Polish immigrants have helped to stem the decline of Britain’s Roman Catholic Church, whose active church goers now equal the typical numbers in the nation’s still officially established Church of England.

Some of Nazir-Ali’s colleagues within his lethargic church defended his warnings against Islamic self-segregation in Britain. Bishop of Burnley John Goddard told The Daily Telegraph that Christians in some areas of his diocese are outnumbered by Muslims and often feel intimidated from openly practicing their faith. “It is not fear that there is going to be retaliation but it is a fear that you get it badly wrong and cause hurt to others of integrity of other faith you did not intend.” He added: “When you engage in proclaiming the Christian faith in an area dominated by another religion, I and others tread very carefully so that the message is heard and not seen as some sort of oppression.”

In response to Britain’s balkanization thanks to secularists and Islamists, Bishop Nazir-Ali urged upholding the importance of the English language, greater integration, and more British citizenship education. “But none of this will be of any avail if Britain does not recover that vision of its destiny which made it great,” he concluded. “That has to do with the Bible’s teaching that we have equal dignity and freedom because we are all made in God’s image.”

Extreme secularists in both Britain and the U.S. naturally prefer to ignore the Jewish and Christian origins of their cultures and democracies. Their extreme version of multiculturalism, while ostensibly intended to protect the dignity of various cultures, instead denigrates Western culture and religion, while enthroning cultures that are hostile to Western democracy. Mainline Protestant clerics, presiding over emptied churches, often enthusiastically endorse this trend. But at least one Church of England bishop of Pakistani origins is warning against the swelling dangers.

This article was originally published on January 21, 2008.

Mark D. Tooley directs the United Methodist committee at the Institute on Religion and Democracy in Washington, D.C.

Anger in Holland over ‘apartheid’ Islamic hospital | International …It has also been dubbed “apartheid” by a prominent nationalist MP, Geert Wilders. But construction work on the clinic is about to start and it aims to open …

the facts that the Palestinians have adopted Islamic law into their constitution, or that they are governed currently by an Islamic party. Why aren’t they labeled as an “Islamic apartheid state”?

American Thinker: Islam’s Apartheid
It is the long sub-humanized Muslim women who must discard Islam and claim their … Islam is religious apartheid. And apartheid, by universal agreement, …

Catholic Insight : Culture : Muslim apartheid: Getting behind the veil1 Jan 2007 … Peter C. Glover discusses the issue of the wearing of the veil by Muslim women and explains how various European nations are tackling it.

From Salman Rushdie to WTC The crimes against humanity of supporters of Islamic Apartheid and their attacks on progress and human rights has not started with their brutal terrorist …

An Unveiling – NRO Symposium – National Review Online 25 Oct 2006 … It is a way of rejecting sexual promiscuity, sexual availability in the West and paradoxically, embracing Islamic gender apartheid (arranged …

Islamic Apartheid – penetrating the West

The Confrontation: Winning the War Against Future Jihad – Page 46 – Walid Phares – Macmillan, 2009 (ISBN 0230611303, 9780230611306) – 304 pages
Jihadi ideologies promote the agenda of separating Muslims from non-Muslims — even within democracies — and of … depending on their readiness and physical capacity to wage it) to establish this apartheid system within the West. …

“Sharia law may result in ‘legal apartheid'”
Senior religious leaders attacked multiculturalism and sharia law, warning that they are “disastrous”, socially divisive and are destroying Britain’s culture and values

Shariah Islamic Law: Legal Apartheid Sep 1, 2009 … They have implicitly accepted a system of “legal apartheid” with different legal systems for Muslims and non-Muslims. …

World Politics Watch | Muslim Apartheid in Britain: A Veiled Threat? The issue of Muslim women wearing veils in public has ignited an unprecedented national debate on the subject and on multiculturalism generally across …

Shame of Britain’s Muslim schools: Secret filming shows pupils being beaten and ‘taught Hindus drink cow p***
‘By Tazeen Ahmad
Last updated at 12:16 PM on 13th February 2011
Undercover footage shows pupils being taught religious apartheid
Muslims who adopt Western ways will be ‘tortured in afterlife’
Unprovoked beatings captured on camera in Yorkshire madrassa
Boy threatened with bench by senior student left in charge of class…
… He refers to the ‘non-Muslims’ as the ‘Kuffar’, an often derogatory term that means disbeliever or infidel…
This school is required by its inspectors to teach tolerance and respect for other faiths. But the Channel 4 current affairs programme Dispatches filmed secretly inside it – and instead discovered that Muslim children are being taught religious apartheid and social segregation.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s