The United Nations’ Second World Conference on Racism (April, 2009) claimed that it would focus on all forms of defamation of religion. 

When it became known that Iranian President Ahmadinejad would be speaking at the Conference, also known as the Durban Conference II, many countries withdrew (see EuropeNews report).

When Ahmadinejad spoke, he accused western nations of defending a form of Israeli Zionism which he considers racist. From that point on, the Conference focused on one thing—“Islamophobia.” Islamophobia implies fearfulness of the Islamic faith and hatred of all Muslims.

The word Islamophobia has been popularized since accusations began against terrorists from Muslim backgrounds after September 11, 2001. In the last couple of years, it has become more and more politically incorrect to denounce even the most radical Islamic terrorism. The term Islamophobia is now being stretched to mean that if you fear or speak out against extreme Islamic terrorism, or you express suspicions of it, then you hate all Muslims. This equation is unfair and untrue. 

Now, the United Nations (UN) is considering a ”Defamation of Religions” resolution by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the largest group of nations within the UN.  Ironically, the OIC itself is made up mostly of nations under dictatorship or tyrannical leadership; many formally recognizing Islam or an Eastern faith as their state religion, and are almost completely intolerant of other religions. Some OIC nations have appeared on the U.S. State Department’s list of “nations of concern” for human rights and religious rights violations. See this 2008 State Department list for example.

The OIC has pushed for this for nearly a decade (per a 2008 Washington Times article), and they have made much headway. Although continued anti-Semitism toward Jewish people and intimidation of Christians has been increasing in many countries which were formerly quite tolerant of various other faiths, the only faith people are afraid to offend today is Islam.

The UN Watch, a Geneva-based human rights group, has decried this latest OIC resolution
as an attempt to imply that defamation of religion makes the Islamic faith itself the real victim of 9/11 –not the 3,000 people who actually died in the attack.

The International Humanist and Ethical Union suggests that a resolution like this would make simple religious disagreement a crime of blasphemy as it already is in some Middle Eastern and Asian countries. This could be especially dangerous if the country considers blasphemy (or “apostasy”) a crime deserving of life imprisonment or death.

Forbidding hate speech against Muslims, and against Islam as a faith, is of course understandable. There are many good and decent Muslims around the world. However, we shouldn’t stop people from speaking out against past terrorism, or expressing warning signs of forthcoming acts of possible terrorism. Case in point: the now-known fact that no one reported the earlier suspicious remarks and activities of the Fort Hood attacker, who – if not a terrorist – was influenced to a certain extent by a jihadist mindset. Instead, the government and media are jumping through hoops to create other scenarios for him.

Another case: In 2007, a University of Florida student group was censored by school authorities from passing out information about a movie revealing the dangers of radical Islamic terrorism. By using the description “radical” before the word “Islamic” and then the word “terrorism” in the title, the flier bearers made it clear that they didn’t want to offend Muslims who disagree with radical Islamic terrorism. Still, according to the Tampa Tribune, the University censored the group’s fliers for not being in the best interest of diversity.  

We must be able to recognize and identify our enemies. True, there is home-grown American terrorism, like Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber. But  avoiding the real possibilities of “extreme Islamic terrorism” is a mistake. In the name of tolerance, events are escalating to desensitize us into our own demise. We are becoming an increasingly easier target.