Islamophobia: Thought Crime of the Totalitarian Future

David Horowitz and Robert Spencer
 
The apologies never end. In the wake of the Benghazi attacks and the murder of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, Barack Obama has just gone to the U.N. and said, with the representatives of Iran and other despotisms in his audience, that the future does not belong to those who slander Mohammed. This was a coded apology for the cartoonish video that this administration continues to believe, in the face of all evidence to the contrary, was the cause of attacks against U.S. diplomatic facilities in Libya and Egypt. This is the delusion that impoliteness about the Prophet, and not planned Islamic terrorism, is the cause of the jihad against us.


This abject appearance by the President before the U.N. was part of a move inside this administration to appease Muslim nations who have begun an offensive to suffocate free speech about the violence and genocide committed in the name of Islam. The U.S. is slowly but certainly accommodating the view that free speech, when it comes to religious (i.e. Muslim) matters, is suspect. We have come to this point, in large part, because of the growing success of the idea that any criticism of Islam is actually a pathology, rather than a legitimate exercise of free speech. It is, in other words, “Islamophobia.”

In their pamphlet, Islamophobia: Thought Crime of the Totalitarian Future, David Horowitz and Robert Spencer document how the origin of the word “Islamophobia” is a coinage of the Muslim Brotherhood. They show how the Brotherhood launched a campaign, by ginning up “Islamophobia” as a hate crime, to stigmatize mention of such issues as radical Islam’s violence against women and murder of homosexuals, and the constant incitement of many imams to terrorism. The authors make the case that “Islamophobia” is a dagger aimed at the heart of free speech and also at the heart of our national security.