text:
I am a postdoctoral researcher and statistical consultant in the Department of Social Neuroscience at the Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences. I conducted my graduate work at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill as part of the Positive Emotions and Psychophysiology Lab.
My research explores the intertwined relationships that link physiological processes and social behavior, as described by the socio-autonomic spiral model of social connection.
My statistical work is conducted primarily in R with a focus on visualizing and analysing hierarchical and complex datasets.
Recent publications
Lumma, A-L., Kok, B.E. & Singer, T. (2015). Is meditation always relaxing? Investigating heart rate, heart rate variability, experienced effort and likeability during training of three types of meditation. International Journal of Physiophysiology, 97(1), 38-45.
Kok, B.E. & Fredrickson, B.L. (2015). Evidence for the Upward Spiral stands steady: A response to Heathers, Brown, Coyne, and Friedman (2015). Psychological Science, 26(7), 1144-1146.
Pek, J., Chalmers, R.P., Kok, B.E. & Losardo, D. (2015). Visualizing confidence bands for semiparametrically estimated nonlinear relations among latent variables. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 40, 402-423.
Kok, B.E., Coffey, K.A., Cohn, M.A., Catalino, L.I., Vacharkulksemsuk, T., Algoe, S., Brantley, M. & Fredrickson, B. L. (2013). How positive emotions build physical health: Perceived positive social connections account for the upward spiral between positive emotions and vagal tone. Psychological Science, 24(7), 1123-1132. Supplemental material. Public access data available as part of the Open Science Framework.


text:
The publication of this book, three years ago, was received in the West with some enthusiasm. The volume seemed to promise that the dream of numerous observers of the Muslim world—that a "moderate" Islamist ideology could emerge and that it would paired with an opening to free-market economics—would be realized after many decades, if not centuries. Unfortunately, the flow of history since 2011, especially in the author's native Turkey, has discredited such fancies. Democratization of the Arab countries and liberalization of Turkey have nearly disappeared from dialogue on the future of Islam. The "Arab Spring" now resembles a sad joke, and Turkish democracy is an object of rebuke.
Akyol, the son of a prominent Turkish journalist, had followed in his father's professional footsteps, becoming a commentator in Turkish newspapers and gaining significant access to media in the United States. In the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist atrocities, he appeared frequently in Washington, visiting conservative and libertarian think-tanks and spreading a message of support for the then-novel idea of "Islamism-lite" represented by Turkish prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and his Justice and Development Party (AKP).
Akyol argued that the AKP's ideology was based on entrepreneurship and, therefore, on freedom. He proposed that the party's program would reinforce religious values in the public sphere without interfering with a general secularism in the state structure, an Islamic parallel to the Christian Democrats of Europe. This narrative of an Islamic politics wedded to capitalism—a "bourgeois revolution" within the world's Muslim community—met inevitably with favor in the West. The reality, however, was far less rosy, and Islam without Extremes went to great lengths to paper over the problematical aspects of such reveries.
The most obvious obstacle to this tale of "capitalist Islamism" was the absence of a religious business class in Turkey for much of its history. More than seventy-five years of official secularism—resting on the army and a French-style conception of a single, supposedly unifying, national identity that would replace religious, ethnic, and other differences—had at the same time, placed the levers of the economy firmly in the hands of the state. Since its secularized beginnings in 1922, Turkey had become a one-party regime under Mustafa Kemal's Republican People's Party (CHP). The legacy of Kemalism began to unravel in 1950 when Turkey's first free and fairly-counted national balloting produced a victory for a pro-U.S. opposition movement led by Adnan Menderes (1899-1961). Menderes was removed by the military in 1960 and hanged the next year. In the four decades that followed, Turkish politics oscillated between militarism, secularism, and the slow, then rapid, rise of Islamist forces.
Akyol presented the emergence and growth of Islamist politics in Turkey as representing an "increasing … aspir[ation] to democracy." But his own account of the numerous conflicts that accompanied the ascent of "Islamic liberalism" disproved his analysis by showing that under a thin garment of economic "liberalism," the ogre of Islamist ideology remained alive and menacing.
The book's introduction includes dismaying details unlikely to be noticed by someone not well-versed in Turkish history. The author's father was jailed by the military authorities in 1980, and Akyol visited him in prison, which he recalls as "tyranny not in the name of Islam … but in the name of the secular state." Although insisting that his father's only offense was "being a public intellectual," he soon reveals nonchalantly that Akyol père was a supporter of the Nationalist Action Party (MHP). The author neglects to mention that the MHP, headed by the sinister Alparslan Türkeş (1917-97), had conducted a widespread campaign of assassinations and massacres directed against the radical Left, the heterodox Alevi Muslim minority, and secularist intellectuals during the second half of the 1970s. He also ignores its terrorist youth arm, the "Grey Wolves," notwithstanding that even today its activities threaten secularists and Alevis.
Islam prior to the Ottoman era was presented by Akyol as the "curious story" of the faith and its intellectual development. In the author's rush to acclaim a recent, purported Turkish "synthesis of Islam and liberalism," he sacrificed nuances in Islamic historiography involving topics such as the unsettled debate over rationalism posed by the intellectual attitudes of the Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties. Akyol appeared heavily invested in the ignorance of his readers, believing that simply repeating buzzwords such as "rationalism," "liberalism," and "democracy" would suffice to win over his audience.
Akyol advocated for nineteenth-century Ottoman reformers and their supposed heirs. In his view, this legacy is represented by the ostensible "democratic conservatism" of the AKP and the successive administrations led by Erdoğan, who trained as a Muslim cleric.
The author noted correctly that the appeal of the AKP was enhanced by the development, at last, of an Islamist business class of rural origin, the so-called "Anatolian tigers." Akyol then simplistically equated private enterprise with democracy. But if capitalism in the past and in the West led inevitably to civil society and thence to democracy, it seems to have had an opposite outcome in such countries as China, post-Soviet Russia, and Turkey. Civil society has been weak in the first two, and because it was secular, civil society became a target of the AKP in Akyol's native land.
In his description of the AKP, Akyol neglects to note how the party emerged from Milli Görüş (National Vision), another ultra-rightist movement, led by the political leader and flamboyant demagogue Necmettin Erbakan (1926-2011). While pointing out that the AKP and Milli Görüş split when Erdoğan endorsed the application for Turkish membership in the European Union, Akyol overstates the alienation of the AKP from Milli Görüş, notorious for its anti-Western, Jew-baiting, and conspiratorial attitudes. As demonstrated in numerous instances of anti-Jewish and anti-Israel rage by the AKP, Milli Görüş cadres—including Erdoğan himself—have entered the AKP without changing their basic outlook. Akyol appears to be cut from this same cloth as he repeats the libel that Jews believe "they had an inherent sense of superiority over the Gentiles." Akyol's ardor for the "Turkish model" as an exemplar for other Muslim societies and the Arab uprisings, which had just begun when his book was published, further undermined his thesis. Akyol benignly described "a more democratic era … apparently at dawn in the Muslim world" and the Muslim Brotherhood as "changed" into a democratic Islamist phenomenon. The mass disaffection with AKP in Turkey, the reestablishment of military rule in Egypt, and the horrific bloodshed in Syria must leave him downcast.
Islam without Extremes closes with Akyol's ambiguous defense of the rights to apostasy and criticism of Islam in his brave new world, combined with the suggestion that under "Islamic democracy," drinking alcohol would not be prohibited. This would perhaps be amusing if the 2013 Taksim Square demonstrations in Istanbul and other cities, put down violently, if only temporarily, by the AKP, had not been in some part an outcome of Erdoğan's announcement that the advertising and sale of alcoholic beverages should be restricted.
More disturbingly, Akyol ignores the repellent record of Erdoğan's clique in promoting purge trials based on the questionable "Ergenekon" and "Sledgehammer" conspiracies, or the discomfiting statistic that Turkey under the AKP leads the world in persecuting journalists. More recent challenges to the AKP utopia have included legal inquiries into corrupt practices by members of Erdoğan's family, Erdoğan's outlandish reaction to these events, in which he banned Twitter and YouTube for reposting news of the judicial inquiries, and Erdoğan's messy split with rival Islamist Fethullah Gülen.
Akyol is neither the first nor the last author to be inconvenienced by events that failed to conform to hurried and exuberant claims about incidents taking place as he wrote. It is only unfortunate that the fantasies expressed in this book may have gained him credibility, at least temporarily, among the U.S. political elite, hypnotized by the exploitation of entrepreneurial and democratic promises.
Stephen Schwartz is a principal investigator at the Center for Islamic Pluralism (CIP). First published at Middle East Quarterly.]]>
At a time when terrorism committed in the name of Islam is rampant, we are continuously being assured—especially by three major institutions that play a dominant role in forming the Western mindset, namely, mainstream media, academia, and government—that the sort of Islam embraced by "radicals," "jihadis," and so forth, has nothing to do with "real" Islam.
"True" Islam, so the narrative goes, is intrinsically free of anything "bad." It's the nut-jobs who hijack it for their own agenda that are to blame.
More specifically, we are told that there exists a "moderate" Islam and an "extremist" Islam—the former good and true, embraced by a Muslim majority, the latter a perverse sacrilege practiced by an exploitative minority.
But what do these dual adjectives—"moderate" and "extremist"—ultimately mean in the context of Islam? Are they both equal and viable alternatives insofar as to how Islam is understood? Are they both theologically legitimate? This last question is particularly important, since Islam is first and foremost a religious way of life centered around the words of a deity (Allah) and his prophet (Muhammad)—the significance of which is admittedly unappreciated by secular societies.
Both terms—"moderate" and "extremist"—have to do with degree, or less mathematically,zeal: how much, or to what extent, a thing is practiced or implemented. As Webster's puts it, "moderate" means "observing reasonable limits"; "extremist" means "going to great or exaggerated lengths."
It's a question, then, of doing either too much or too little.
The problem, however, is that mainstream Islam offers a crystal-clear way of life, based on the teachings of the Koran and Hadith—the former, containing what purport to be the sacred words of Allah, the latter, the example (or sunna, hence "Sunnis") of his prophet, also known as the most "perfect man" (al-insan al-kamil). Indeed, based on these two primary sources and according to normative Islamic teaching, all human actions fall into five categories: forbidden actions, discouraged actions, neutral actions recommended actions, and obligatory actions.
In this context, how does a believer go about "moderating" what the deity and his spokesman have commanded? One can either try to observe Islam's commandments or one can ignore them: any more or less is not Islam—a word which means "submit" (to the laws, or sharia, of Allah).
The real question, then, is what do Allah and his prophet command Muslims ("they who submit") to do? Are radicals "exaggerating" their orders? Or are moderate Muslims simply "observing reasonable limits"—a euphemism for negligence?—when it comes to fulfilling their commandments?
In our highly secularized era, where we are told that religious truths are flexible or simply non-existent, and that any and all interpretations and exegeses are valid, the all-important question of "What does Islam command?" loses all relevance.
Hence why the modern West is incapable of understanding Islam.
Indeed, only recently, a Kenyan mosque leader said that the Westgate massacre, where Islamic gunmen slaughtered some 67 people, "was justified. As per the Koran, as per the religion of Islam, Westgate was 100 percent justified." Then he said: "Radical Islam is a creation of people who do not believe in Islam. We don't have radical Islam, we don't have moderates, we don't have extremists. Islam is one religion following the Koran and the Sunna" [emphasis added].
Note his point that "Radical Islam is a creation of people who do not believe in Islam," a clear reference to the West which coined the phrase "radical Islam." Ironically, the secular West, which relegates religious truths to the realm of "personal experience," feels qualified to decide what is and is not "radical" about Islam.
Consider one example: Allah commands Muslims to "Fight those among the People of the Book [Jews and Christians] who do not believe in Allah nor the Last Day, nor forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden, nor embrace the religion of truth [i.e., Islam], until they pay the jizya [tribute] with willing submission and feel themselves subdued" [Koran 9:29].
How can one interpret this verse to mean anything other than what it plainly says? Wherein lies the ambiguity, the room for interpretation? Of course there are other teachings and allusions in the Koran that by necessity lend themselves over to the fine arts of interpretation, or ijtihad. But surely the commands of Koran 9:29 are completely straightforward?
In fact, Muhammad's 7th century followers literally acted on this and similar verses (e.g., 9:5), launching the first Muslim conquests, which saw the subjugation of millions of Christians, Jews, and others, and the creation of the "Muslim world." Such jihadi expansion continued until Islam was beaten on the battlefield by a resurgent West some two or three centuries ago.
Western scholarly works, before the age of relativism and political correctness set in, did not equivocate the meaning of jihad. Thus the authoritative Encyclopaedia of Islam's entry for "jihad" states that the "spread of Islam by arms is a religious duty upon Muslims in general … Jihad must continue to be done until the whole world is under the rule of Islam … Islam must completely be made over before the doctrine of jihad [warfare to spread Islam] can be eliminated. Islamic law expert and U.S. professor Majid Khadduri (1909-2007), after defining jihad as warfare, wrote that "jihad … is regarded by all jurists, with almost no exception, as a collective obligation of the whole Muslim community."
(As for the argument that the Bible contains similar war verses, yet Jews and Christians are not out to conquer the world—so why say Muslims are?—see "Are Judaism and Christianity as Violent as Islam" for a detailed breakdown of the similarities and differences. Also see "Islamic Jihad and the Doctrine of Abrogation" to understand how the Koran's more tolerant verses have been abrogated by its more militant ones, such as 9:29.)
In short, how can a sincere Muslim—by definition, one who has submitted to the teachings of Allah—"moderate" verses like 9:29? How can he "observe reasonable limits" vis-à-vis these plain commands to combat and subjugate non-Muslims?
Must Muslims not, at the very least, admit that such teachings are true and should be striven for—even if they do not personally engage in the jihad, at least not directly (but they are encouraged to support it indirectly, including monetarily or through propaganda)?
Just recently, reports appeared telling of how Islamic groups in Syria were following Koran 9:29 to a tee—forcing Christian minorities to pay them jizya, i.e., extortion money, in exchange for their lives. In fact, all around the Islamic world, Christians and other minorities are regularly plundered by Muslims who justify their actions by referring to the aforementioned verse.
Are all such Muslims being "extreme" in light of the commands of Koran 9:29—which specifically calls for the taking of money from Christians and Jews—or are they simply upholding the unambiguous teachings of Islam?
One may argue that, if Muslims are to take Koran 9:29 literally, why are Muslim nations the world over not declaring an all-out jihad on all non-Muslim nations, including America? The ultimate reason, of course, is that they simply can't; they do not have the capability to uphold that verse (and Islamic teaching allows Muslims to postpone their obligations until circumstances are more opportune).
It would obviously be silly, if not suicidal, for, say, Saudi Arabia, birthplace of Islam, to issue a statement to the West saying either accept Islam, pay jizya/tribute, or die by the sword. But just because Muslim nations do not currently have the capacity to actualize Koran 9:29, does not mean that they do not acknowledge its veracity and try to actualize it in other places when they can.
A quick survey of history before the meteoric rise of Western military might put Islam in check makes this especially clear.
Bottom line: If Islam teaches X and a Muslim upholds X—how is he being "extreme"? Seems more logical to say that it is Islam itself that is being "extreme." Similarly, if a self-professed Muslim does not uphold Islamic teachings—including prayer, fasting, paying zakat, etc.—how is he being a "moderate"? Seems more logical to say that he is not much of a Muslim at all—that is, he is not submitting to Allah, the very definition of "Muslim."
It's time to acknowledge that dichotomized notions like "moderate" and "extreme" are culturally induced and loaded standards of the modern, secular West—hardly applicable to the teachings of Islam—and not universal absolutes recognized by all mankind.
Raymond Ibrahim, author of Crucified Again: Exposing Islam's New War on Christians (Regnery, April, 2013) is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum. First published at CBN News and MEF.]]>
Young Islamists and their sympathizers are tagging, stenciling, painting, vandalizing and using every genre of graffiti to spread the global jihadist message. Similar to other gangs they are using spray paint to mark their territory, demonstrate their allegiance, advertise their gang's status and power, memorialize fallen fellow gang members, praise violence and threaten their enemies. Jihadist graffiti functions as communication and recruitment and is popping up in cities around the world including: Toronto, London, Dublin, Derry, Glasgow, Augsburg, Munich, Moscow, Toulouse, Frejus, Helsinki, Rome, Crete, Jerusalem, Beirut, Salt lake City, New York City, Washington, D.C. Detroit, Chicago, Philadelphia, Oakland and many others. Islamist graffiti is a popular artistic form of rebellion that portrays the global jihad movement as hip and cool. It appeals to young people who do not consider graffiti vandalism but view it as artistic expression and an agency for popular resistance and change. Spray painting Islamist slogans and jihadist phrases goes beyond graffiti as protest art. Islamist graffiti is a symbolic warfare tactic, a successful stealth information strategy camouflaged as street art.
Although Islamist graffiti is relatively new to Western cities, the words, signs and symbols of terrorist groups have been proudly spray painted on their home turf for decades. Similar to gangs who mark their neighborhoods with slogans or symbols exclusive to the gang, Palestinian terrorist groups spray paint their emblems on the walls of Nablus, Gaza City and Ramallah, often not far from posters glorifying suicide bombers. Gang graffiti also frequently includes the territory claimed by the gang. Similarly Palestinian graffiti often depicts the map of Israel to represent what they consider to be their turf.
Gang graffiti often includes threats and challenges to rival gangs. Islamist gang graffiti functions the same way. On December 10, 2009, the words 'Islam will dominate the world – Osama is on his way' and 'Kill Gordon Brown' were spray painted on a war memorial in Burton-on-Trent, Staffordshire, England. On August 4, 2011 a swastika and the message "Islam will rule" were spray-painted on the Robbins Hebrew Academy, an elementary school attached to a Synagogue in Toronto. On May 13, 2008 stores, pavements and the walls of four synagogues in Stamford Hill and Clapton Common neighborhoods in London were spray painted with 40 pieces of graffiti that read "Jihad to Israel" and "Jihad to Tel Aviv. Often Jihadist gang graffiti is not even considered vandalism or threatening and goes unrecognized as hate speech or terroristic threats. This is because the most common words that appear in Islamist graffiti: Jihad, Intifada and Allahu Akbar, are regarded as non-threatening expressions of faith and/or resistance to oppression.
The word Jihad has been the subject matter in graffiti for years, often flying under the radar as street art. On June 15, 2013 JIHAD was spray painted in black lettering, nearly 20 feet high, on a wall along the northbound lanes of Interstate 95 in Delray Beach, Florida. In Oakland, California a graffiti writer who goes by the name of JIHAD is part of the PI Crew and has been painting large scale (master) pieces of the word JIHAD all over Oakland. The incongruity of the term jihad appearing in large graffiti pieces makes one question if the street artist name was chosen to garner attention and perhaps completely unrelated to Islam. Images of hijab clad women by the same graffiti artist put to rest any doubt. Imagine the response if a graffiti writer chose 'RAHOWA', a white supremacists acronym for Racial Holy War, as his street name and painted 50 foot murals of the white supremacist call to holy war all over the city. He would be accused of racism and charged with a hate crime. Even if this young street artist believes jihad means inner struggle and is unaware that he is advocating holy war, his 'JIHAD' graffiti is extremely popular on the internet spreading the message. Jihadists around the world must be enjoying the fact that their battle cry is being proudly displayed in American cities. Perhaps Jihad of the PI Crew is a young Muslim convert who knows exactly what he is doing and his graffiti bombing is a prelude to actual bombings.
Jihadists often spray paint the phrase Allahu Akbar on war memorials and churches symbolizing Islam's supremacy over other religions. On December 4, 2013 the gates of the Augsburg Cathedral, the Moritz church and the evangelical Ulrich church in Augsburg, Germany were sprayed with white Arabic letters spelling out Allahu Akbar. The next day "Allahu Akbar, Jihad" in Arabic was sprayed on St. Michael's and St. Benedict's churches in Munich, Germany. On September 30, 2013, "Allahu Akbar" in Arabic was spray painted in red on a paratrooper memorial in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood in Jerusalem. In August 2013 the Helsinki Living Word Church located in Eastern Pasila, was vandalized three times with Islamist graffiti. The messages read "Allahu Akbar", "Jesus is a Muslim" and "Islam is the answer".
Gangs often leave graffiti at the scene of a burglary or other crime. Similarly, jihadist gangs write Allahu Akbar at the scene of their crimes as a mark of victory and supremacy. Victory graffiti that read "Allahu Akbar" and "Death to Russians!" was spray painted on the wall of Planernaya subway station in the Moscow subway on April 3, 2010 marking the success of two suicide bombings that occurred a few days earlier. On September 11, 2012 after murdering the American Ambassador to Libya members of al Qaeda gang set Ansar al Sharia spray-painted Allahu Akbar on the burned out buildings of the U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi marking their turf and further dishonoring America. A burned out house in Windsor, Connecticut also had Allahu Akbar painted on it. A photo of the house was posted on Jihad watch on August 17, 2013. On June 28, 2012 the words "Allah Wakbar" were written in pink and black marker on a seat in the World Trade Center memorial plaza. The misspelled word could be the result of a non-English speaker or a young American recruit who has not yet learned how to spell the battle cry. These are just a few examples of Jihadist gang victory graffiti left at the scene of crimes.
Graffiti is often used to promote or enhance the names and reputations of the gang and to memorialize dead gang members. Osama bin Laden, the Sheik of the Mujahideen gangbangers has been both glorified and memorialized in graffiti. Similar to the word 'Jihad' the name Osama has been spray painted by graffiti writers in large letters on walls and trains. A popular method of glorifying bin Laden is a stencil graffiti of his portrait similar in style to the iconic image of Che Guevara. The stenciled graffiti portrait that sometimes includes the words Rest in Peace have popped up everywhere from Brooklyn, New York to Bangor, Wales. On May 2, 2011, immediately after the news of his death, a 50 foot long tribute to bin Laden was spray painted in black on the sound wall of Orange County's I-405 freeway in Westminster, California. The memorial to the al Qaeda gang leader depicted an upside down American flag with the words un-American written over it flanked by the script "R.I.P. Osama" and "Forever."
Mohamed Merah, the 23 year old al Qaeda Mujahideen gangbanger who killed three French paratroopers, a rabbi and three children ages 4, 5, and 7 in a series of three gun attacks in March 2012 in Toulouse and Montauban, France has several graffiti tributes. Graffiti on the wall of a French house in Tarbes read, "You were a valiant Knight of Islam! You fought the shit Zionist and the false Muslims. You died guns in hand… I salute you Mohamed my brother, my friend… Rest in peace!" Graffiti in Toulouse read "Viva Merah", and in the Sainte-Croix neighborhood of Fréjus graffiti paying respect to Mohamad Merah and al Qaeda was spray painted on a house. Who knows how many other young discontented French teens were inspired by Merah and look forward to having their name celebrated in spray paint.
Jihadists use graffiti in the same manner and for the same reasons as any other criminal street gang. The writings need to be recognized and documented using methods that law enforcement currently employ to track gang activity, membership, rivalries and affiliations with larger gangs. Spray painting the words Jihad, Intifada or Allahu Akbar does not represent benign expressions of faith or popular resistance. Jihadist gang graffiti embodies Islamist messaging that has a significant impact in recruiting homegrown terrorists, inciting violence and is an indicator of future criminal and terrorist activity.
Dawn Perlmutter Director of Symbol & Ritual Intelligence and Shillman/Ginsburg Writing Fellow at the Middle East Forum is considered one of the leading subject matter experts in the areas of symbols, unfamiliar customs, ritual murder and religious violence. First published at Middle East Forum and FrontpageMagazine.]]>
The Organization of Islamic Cooperation, an influential bloc of 57 Muslim countries, has released the latest edition of its annual "Islamophobia" report. The Sixth OIC Observatory Report on Islamophobia: October 2012-September 2013 is a 94-page document purporting to "offer a comprehensive picture of Islamophobia, as it exists mainly in contemporary Western societies." But the primary objective of the OIC—headquartered in Saudi Arabia and funded by dozens of Muslim countries that systematically persecute Christians and Jews—has long been to pressure Western countries into passing laws that would ban "negative stereotyping of Islam."
In this context, the OIC's annual Islamophobia report—an integral part of a sustained effort to prove the existence of a "culture of intolerance of Islam and Muslims" in the West—is in essence a lobbying tool to pressure Western governments to outlaw all forms of "Islamophobia," a nebulous concept invented by the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1990s. The OIC report comprises five main chapters and several annexes aimed at documenting "incidents of slandering and demeaning Muslims and their sacred symbols including attacks on mosques, verbal abuses and physical attacks against adherents of Islam, mainly due to their cultural traits."
But the common thread that binds the entire document together is the OIC's repeated insistence that the main culprit responsible for "the institutionalization of Islamophobia" in Western countries is freedom of speech, which the OIC claims has "contributed enormously to snowball Islamophobia and manipulate the mindset of ordinary Western people to develop a 'phobia' of Islam and Muslims." According to the OIC, freedom of expression is shielding "the perpetrators of Islamophobia, who seek to propagate irrational fear and intolerance of Islam, [who] have time and again aroused unwarranted tension, suspicion and unrest in societies by slandering the Islamic faith through gross distortions and misrepresentations and by encroaching on and denigrating the religious sentiments of Muslims."
Chapter 1 of the report deals with "Islamophobia, Intolerance and Discrimination against Muslims," and purports to reveal the "unabated rise of Islamophobia in Western countries, thereby exacerbating tensions at all levels and constituting additional obstacles to the diversity and multicultural fabrics of the societies."
According to the OIC, freedom of speech is to blame for the "perpetuation of Islamophobia," which:
…has become increasingly widespread, which, in turn, has caused an increase in the actual number of hate crimes committed against Muslims. These crimes range from the usual verbal abuse and discrimination, particularly in the fields of education and employment, to other acts of violence and vandalism, including physical assaults, attacks on Islamic centers and the desecration of mosques and cemeteries.
In this context, acceptance of various forms of intolerance, including hate speech and the propagation of negative stereotypes against Islam and Muslims in some western countries contribute towards proliferation of intolerant societies. This process is further supported by… the exploitation of freedom of expression and perpetuation of an ideological context advocating an inescapable conflict of civilizations."
Another factor favoring "the climate of intolerance" is:
…the negative role played by major media outlets who not only propagate stereotypes and misperceptions about Islam, but also undermine and usually keep shadowed any meaningful instance of individuals or groups speaking out against intolerance, including advocacy of religious hatred and violence. This biased approach of the media has helped drawing an emphatically demonized, sometimes dehumanized, image of Muslims in the minds of a certain class of people which is predisposed to xenophobic feelings due to the increasingly dire economic situation, or the simply to the irrational fear of the other."
Chapter 2 of the report deals with "Manifestations of Islamophobia in the West." According to the OIC:
The number of Islamophobic incidents continues to rise in the US, as a result of anti-Muslim propaganda. It is particularly alarming that anti-Muslim sentiments are taking deeper roots infiltrating further in the educational system. Notable among several other worrying trends/cases are: the initiatives taken by a leading and powerful US legislator [US Representative Peter King] to convene special Congressional Hearings on Radicalization of Islam in the US… In the same vein, the Republican Party in the recent 2013 [sic] US Presidential elections also used the anti-Islam card as a strategy.
With regard to Islamophobic trends in Europe, various reports and polls have revealed growing misperception vis-à-vis Islam and Muslims. Among the most common and recurring… are the ideas that Muslims are inclined to violence including revenge and retaliation; that Islam is an inherently expansionist religion, which strives for political influence, and whose followers are obsessed with proselytizing others, and more generally that Islam deprives women of their rights and encourages religious fanaticism and radicalism. According to the same polls, only a minor portion of the public tends to see Islam in a more positive light, as being a religion of peace that preaches love for neighbors, charity, openness and tolerance… Muslims who live in xenophobic environments are more exposed to daily stress and other forms of moral prejudice."
The OIC concludes that "journalists and media organizations have a responsibility to avoid promoting rhetoric of hate by acting as a platform for its widespread dissemination."
Chapter 3 of the OIC report highlights "Some Positive Developments" in terms of initiatives and other steps and positions taken to combat Islamophobia, including:
…the condemnation of anti-Muslim hate speech by various quarters, including non-Muslim religious leaders; the barring from entry of certain Islamophobes to a number of countries where they intended to take part in anti-Muslim rallies or deliver inflammatory lectures; the recognition of Muslim holidays and other strict sanctions taken against acts of manifest religious intolerance. It was noted with satisfaction that a number of international organizations, including UNSECO, the OSCE and the Council of Europe, have recognized the danger posed by Islamophobia and have taken concrete steps to combat it, notably by laying down Guidelines for Educators on Countering Intolerance and Discrimination against Muslims."
Chapter 4 of the report, "OIC Initiatives and Activities to Counter Islamophobia," focused on the OIC's ongoing efforts to promote the so-called Istanbul Process, an aggressive effort by Muslim countries to make it an international crime to criticize Islam. The explicit aim of the Istanbul Process is to enshrine in international law a global ban on all critical scrutiny of Islam and Islamic Sharia law.
In recent years, the OIC has been engaged in a determined diplomatic offensive to persuade Western democracies to implement United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) Resolution 16/18, which calls on all countries to combat "intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization of… religion and belief." (Analysis of the OIC's war on free speech can be found here and here.) Resolution 16/18, which was adopted at HRC headquarters in Geneva in March 2011 (with the support of the Obama Administration)—together with the OIC-sponsored Resolution 66/167, which was quietly approved by the 193-member UN General Assembly on December 19, 2011—is widely viewed as marking a significant step forward in OIC efforts to advance the international legal concept of defaming Islam.
According to the OIC report:
In November 2012, a special ministerial barnstorming session was convened on the sidelines of the 39th session of the OIC Council of Foreign Ministers, which aimed at devising an OIC Approach for Combating Discrimination and Intolerance against Muslims…The session… called for constituting a panel of eminent persons including renowned legal experts and human rights practitioners to offer its expert view on the issue of religious intolerance and incitement to hatred to the 12th Islamic Summit. The panel, which was held in Istanbul, in January 2013, expressed support for the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) Resolution 16/18, on combating intolerance, discrimination, incitement to violence and violence on the basis of religion or belief.
The OIC also hosted the 3rd Meeting of International Experts on the Implementation of UNHRC Resolution 16/18, under the framework of the Istanbul Process… The meeting… attended by delegations from over sixty countries… reaffirmed the international community's commitment to Resolution 16/18 and the need to focus on its implementation."
Chapter 5 of the OIC report provides a set of conclusions and recommendations, which call on Western governments, international organizations and non-state actors to:
Take all necessary measures within their power and legal/jurisdictional systems to ensure a safe environment free from Islamophobic harassment… by strictly enforcing applicable hate crime and discrimination laws;
Create, whenever necessary, specialized bodies and initiatives in order to combat Islamophobia… based on internationally recognized human rights principles and standards;
Combat Islamophobic hate crimes, which can be fuelled by Islamophobic hate speech in the media and on the Internet;
Take all necessary measures to ensure that the media refrains from serving as a platform for the dissemination of hate speech… by associating extremism and terrorism to Islam and Muslims… and presents the true positive nature of Islam.
Implement provisions of UNHRC Resolution 16/18 through the Istanbul Process mechanism as it offers a positive platform for debate, exchange of best practices and maintaining of a common and unified stance."
The report states that "the OIC and the Member States should not be complacent in underscoring the fact that our present day world is gradually being driven towards the dangerous precipices of growing intolerance of religious and cultural diversity. This is the clear and present danger that the OIC has been consistent in warning the international community against. The sooner the phenomenon of Islamophobia is addressed, the better it is for ensuring peaceful coexistence of the present as well for the future generations to come."
The report concludes with the transcript of a speech by OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, in which he thanks American and European political leaders for their help (here and here) in advancing his efforts to restrict free speech in the West.
"The Istanbul Process initiated with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Catherine Ashton to build further on the consensus building that went into Resolution 16/18 must be carried forward. While the resolution forms a triumph of multilateralism, Istanbul Process must also be seen as a poster child of OIC-US-EU cooperation… I appreciate that this Process has come to be recognized as the way forward by all stakeholders… We need to build on it," Ihsanoglu said.
First published at Gatestone Institute.]]>
In its quest to criminalize speech that's critical of all Islam-related topics, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) 1 endorsed the formation of a new Advisory Media Committee to address "Islamophobia." This past September, the OIC held "The First International Conference on Islamophobia: Law & Media." The conference endorsed numerous recommendations which arose from prior workshops on Islamophobia from media, legal and political perspectives. A main conclusion was the consensus to institutionalize the conference and create an Advisory Media Committee to meet under the newly established OIC Media Forum based in Istanbul Turkey.
Supposedly, the purpose of the conference was to support an OIC campaign to "correct the image of Islam and Muslims in Europe and North America." By this, it means to whitewash the intolerant, violent and discriminatory aspects of Islam and Islamists. The OIC has launched a campaign to provide disinformation to the public, delinking all Islam from these undesirable traits and attacks all who insist on these truths, as bigots, racists and Islamophobes.
The OIC is a 57 member organization consisting of Muslim countries whose long term goal is the worldwide implementation of Sharia law and seemingly the ultimate establishment of a Caliphate. Its members tend to vote together as a block in the UN, so it is extremely powerful, despite the fact that few people have heard of it.
Its present goal is the international criminalization of all speech that "defames" Islam, which the OIC defines as anything that sheds a negative light on Islam or Muslims, even when it's true.
Its target is the West and one of its tactics is to accuse those who criticize Islam or its various interpretations as "Islamophobic." It is attempting to pass the equivalent of Islamic blasphemy codes in the West, using accusations of bigotry to silence anyone who speaks the truth about Islamic terrorism or Islamic persecution of religious minorities.
The OIC uses international bodies such as the UN and international "consensus building" as a platform to achieve its goals. Certainly, if the OIC straightforwardly informed America and Europe of its aspirations to silence speech, it would gain no strides. Therefore, it uses bureaucratic, unaccountable entities such as the UN as a means to make inroads, using watered down language and words that sound palatable to the West in order to deceive the public about its underlying goals.
Unfortunately, the OIC has been fairly successful in passing UN resolutions that if implemented, would have the effect of stifling speech that "defames religions." Of course, the OIC is only concerned with the defamation of Islam. Indeed, OIC countries all have some sort of Islamic blasphemy laws which prohibit such defamation. To be certain, these laws are regularly used to criminally punish those who speak critically of Islam. These laws are also used to justify persecution of religious minorities. For example, in many OIC countries, openly practicing a version of Islam not sanctioned by the government can land one in jail for blasphemy. The OIC has no reciprocity in refraining from "defamation" of Judaism, Christianity, or other religions.
After the US realized that the UN resolution to Combat Defamation of Religions had a potentially disastrous impact on free expression, the US State Department asked the OIC to draft an alternative resolution that would address "Islamophobia" concerns and still retain free speech. The OIC produced Resolution 16/18 to Combat Intolerance Based on Religion or Belief. Initially, the State Department interpreted this resolution to protect religious minorities of all stripes from discrimination and violence, while still retaining freedom of speech.
The OIC, however, has made it clear that it clings to its goal to protect Islam from so-called defamation. Indeed, it has manipulated the language in resolution to do just that.
Rizwan Saeed Sheikh, spokesman for the OIC Secretary General has explained that the OIC's goal is to make "denigration of religions" a crime. Somehow, over time, the State Department appears to have adopted the OIC's view that the West is Islamophobic and that Islam is a religion of peace which should never be associated with terrorism. Toward this end, the Obama Administration has completely purged all its counterterrorism training programs from any mention of Islamic terrorism. Only "right-wing extremists" persist in using the term, and of course are "Islamophobes" for doing so.
The OIC's claims that it seeks to protect all religions and religious symbols from defamation are patently false and are contrary to the actions of the OIC countries which discriminate against infidels. In Saudi Arabia, Jews are denied citizenship; in Iran, Baha'is are denied equal employment opportunities; in Pakistan, Ahmadiyya Muslims are jailed for openly practicing their faith, and there's a genocide against Coptic Christians in Egypt. Many OIC countries also prohibit the building or repair of churches and synagogues as well as public worship by minority religions.
The September meeting constituted the third Istanbul Conference: international meetings designed to implement Resolution 16/18 in support of the OIC's agenda to combat "Islamophobia" in the West.
If the OIC really wanted to combat Islamophobia, it would persuade terrorists to refrain from violence; it would condemn the genocide of Coptic Christians in Egypt and it would spare little girls from forced marriages in OIC countries. The OIC has the power to stop the denigration of Jewish, Christian, Zorastrian and Baha'i religious symbols in the OIC countries. It can pressure IC member states to implement domestic policies that will honor and respect minority religions in the Middle East and elsewhere. Do this, and "Islamophobia" in the West will dissipate.
Instead, the OIC requests that the media censor their reports about Islamic terrorism, Islamic persecution of religious minorities and human rights violations committed in the name of Islam, as an interim step toward the criminalization of such speech. All of this will only serve to increase, not decrease "Islamophobia."
The clash of civilizations widens.
Deborah Weiss, Esq. is a journalist and an expert in the Defamation of Religions resolutions. Read a CT interview with her on the OIC, UN Resolutions, blasphemy laws and defamation of religion. This article was commissioned by The Legal Project, an activity of the Middle East Forum. First published at FrontpageMag and The Legal Project.
A recent Arabic article appearing in Egypt's Al Ahram newspaper titled "Is Terrorism Jihad?" written by Islamic law expert Dr. Abdul Fatah Idris offers important lessons—from the fact that jihad does involve subjugating non-Muslims to why the Western mentality is still incapable of acknowledging it.
Idris, professor and chairman of Al Azhar University's Department of Comparative Jurisprudence at the Faculty of Sharia Law, is a well-reputed legal scholar. He begins his article by quoting from various international bodies that correctly define terrorism as violence or threats of violence as a means of coercion.
Idris also mentions how "the Islamic Research Academy, in its report issued on November 4th, 2001, defines terrorism as terrorizing innocent people and the destruction of their properties and their essential elements of living and attacking their finances and their persons and their liberties and their human dignity without right and spreading corruption throughout the land."
It is interesting to note that, although he quotes from several international bodies, it is only the "Islamic Research Academy" that includes words like "innocent" and "without right," both of which clearly leave much wiggle room to exonerate terrorist acts committed against those perceived as not being "innocent" or who it is a right to terrorize, which according to many Muslims, includes the West.
At any rate, in the context of the Muslim Brotherhood's recent terrorist attacks throughout Egypt—including the destruction of over 80 Christian churches—Idris agrees that,
It is therefore correct to define what happened recently [in Egypt] as terrorism and it cannot be called, as some have done [e.g., Muslim Brotherhood, Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi, et al.], a jihad or ribat in the path of Allah, for the difference between them is vast. Terrorism is a crime, both according to Sharia and the law; and all international conventions consider it a crime and call on all people to fight against it through all means.
Up until this point, Idris defines and agrees with the international definition of terrorism, and portrays the actions of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt (whom he never names) as terrorism.
So far so good.
However, Idris immediately makes a complete reversal in his follow-up sentences:
But jihad in the path of Allah, to make his word supreme, spread his religion, defend the honor of the Islamic nation [umma], and respond to the aggression against Muslims all around the earth—this is jihad: when a Muslim fights an infidel without treaty to make the word of Allah Most High supreme, forcing him to fight or invading his land, this is a permissible matter according to the consensus of the jurists. Indeed, it is an obligation for all Muslims. Now if the deeds of the jihad—including fighting the infidels and breaking their spine through all possible means—are permissible according to Sharia, then it is impossible to define those acts as terrorism, which Sharia-based evidence has made illegitimate. A large gap exists between them [jihad and terrorism]. And there is no connection between what is obligatory [jihad] and what is forbidden [terrorism].
At this point, the befuddled Western reader may be at a loss to understand how, exactly, jihad—"according to the consensus of the jurists," no less—is different from the aforementioned definitions of terrorism.
What's needed here is for the non-Muslim to try to transcend his epistemology and think, for a moment, like an observant Muslim, especially in the context of two points:
Taking these two points together—(1) Allah commands Muslims to wage jihad and (2) it is good for all concerned, a means to a glorious end, i.e., "making Allah's word supreme"—how can Muslims classify jihad as "terrorism," even when, from a non-Muslim perspective, it seems identical to the international definitions of terrorism that Idris himself delineated and agreed with?
In short, jihad is not terrorism simply because Allah says so—even if the two, back in the real world, are identical. In the words of Idris: "Now if the deeds of the jihad—including fighting the infidels and breaking their spine through all possible means—are permissible according to Sharia, then it is impossible to define those acts as terrorism."
Three final thoughts:
And so we come back full circle to the lamentable fact that, while Islam's commands are black and white, so easily ascertained and visible to all, the West still cannot accept reality—thanks in great part to its own endless array of liars, fools, and traitors.
Raymond Ibrahim, author of Crucified Again: Exposing Islam's New War on Christians (Regnery, April, 2013) is a Middle East and Islam specialist, and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum. First published at PJ Media and Middle East Forum.
German federal authorities have responded to earlier criticism by the United Nations' (UN) Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) of lax German hate speech measures with troubling proposals to restrict further freedom of expression. These developments in a case previously documented by my Legal Project (LP) colleague Sam Nunberg and me demonstrate once again the dangers for freedom that foreign organizations can present, especially in light of international campaigns against "Islamophobia."
An April 4, 2013, CERD decision had condemned the German refusal to prosecute former German central bank board member Thilo Sarrazin for hate speech against Arabs and Turks. CERD deemed the discontinuance of Sarrazin's criminal investigation a violation of German commitments under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
In a July 1 verbal note to the Geneva-based CERD, the German federal government responded that it "currently is examining German legislation for the punishment of racist statements in light of" CERD's decision. This examination, though, would take account of the right to free expression. Federal authorities had furthermore requested of the relevant Berlin prosecutors "to review every possibility of reconsidering" Sarrazin's case. Yet, the prosecutors reported, this review of the case's "factual and legal aspects" meant that the "cessation of prosecution stands."
The German government received encouragement in stiffening hate speech laws from the federally-funded nonprofit organization German Institute for Human Rights (Deutsches Institut für Menschenrechte or DIMR). DIMR's Hendrik Cremer, in particular, criticized in an interview that an initial charge of Sarrazin under the German Criminal Code's Section 185 against "Insult" fell through. Cremer found Sarrazin's case "not untypical" as "current precedent" did not allow for "collective insults." Even if statements are racist, "it is regularly assumed that they lack intensity" for an "insulting character" if directed "against a large number of persons." Cremer criticized that racist speech convictions usually affected "only persons who clearly belonged to a rightwing extremist environment" while "racism from the middle of society" went overlooked.
These German developments make all the more worthy of review the lone dissenting opinion in the CERD judgment from the American representative, Georgetown University professor of law Carlos Manuel Vázquez. Vázquez determined that Sarrazin's 2009 interview with a Berlin magazine resulting in prosecution "contains statements that are bigoted and offensive." CERD precedent, however, "does not require the criminal prosecution of all bigoted and offensive statements."
As "extensively explained in writing," both the Berlin prosecutors and a reviewing General Procurator found no basis for insult or "incitement to racial hatred" (German Criminal Code Section 130) charges. The procurator review, for example, found that "Sarrazin did not characterize members of the Turkish minority as 'inferior beings' or 'bereave [sic] them of their right to life as an equally worthy person.'"
Yet CERD itself recognized that a convention violation demanded that a state "acted arbitrarily or denied justice," a "deferential standard…particularly appropriate" with respect to speech. Here state authorities "have a far greater mastery" of the pertinent language than CERD members and a "far better position to gauge the likely impact of the statements in the social context prevailing." Moreover, the convention allowed for prosecutorial "discretion" in preventing both racist speech and any "'chilling' effect" on free speech presented by marginal cases. Issues such as a statement's public significance, danger to public peace, or ability to give notoriety to otherwise insignificant persons could also factor into prosecutorial decisions.
Vázquez did not see Sarrazin's main arguments as hate speech. His "ideas for possible legislation" in the interview involved restricting immigration to skilled workers as well as social spending limitations for immigrants, not racial demagoguery. For Vázquez, "the concept of incitement to legislation is, to my knowledge, a novel one."
Sarrazin also argued with respect to Turks and Arabs that the "culture or belief system that prevails among a national or ethnic group inhibits their chances of achieving a particular goal." This is "not outside the scope of reasoned discourse" and "not prohibited by the Convention." Additionally, "Sarrazin's main point" was that the "provision of social welfare leads to habits and ways of life that inhibit economic success and integration." "It is true," Vázquez noted, that "Sarrazin at times employed denigrating and offensive language." Yet "freedom of expression extends even to statements framed in sharp and caustic terms."
Vázquez's views from the Land of Liberty are far more reasoned than those Germans anxious to do the bidding of CERD's members, most hailing from countries not noted for equality under the law. Stiffer hate speech laws would penalize many controversial political statements and involve the law in all manner of insults unrelated to public peace. It is to be hoped that Germany will ultimately heed Vázquez's restraint, despite successive attempts to overcome rational German rejections of Sarrazin's prosecution. Observers outside of Germany, meanwhile, should take Sarrazin's tale to heart as an example of foreign institutions infringing domestic freedom.
This article was commissioned by The Legal Project, an activity of the Middle East Forum. First published at Frontpage Mag.
In a video of Hosni Mubarak when he was still Egypt's president, the strategies of which he accuses the Muslim Brotherhood have come to pass. What follows are Mubarak's words from a conference in Egypt (date unknown; author's translation):
So they [Brotherhood and affiliates] took advantage of the economic situation by handing out money, to one man 100 Egyptian pounds, or about $30 dollars, [saying,] "Here take this bag of glycerin and throw it here," or do this or that—to create a state of instability in Egypt. And these groups—don't ever believe that they want democracy or anything like that. They are exploiting democracy in order to eliminate democracy. And if they ever do govern, it will be an ugly dictatorship. …. Once a foreigner [likely a Westerner] told me, "Well, if that's the case, why don't you let them form parties?" I told him, "they'd attack each other." He said, "So let them attack each other." I came to understand that by "attack each other" he thought I meant through dialogue. For years we've been trying to dialogue with them, and still are. If the dialogue is limited to words, fine. But when the dialogue goes from words to bullets and bombs… [Mubarak shakes his head, and then gives anecdotes of Egyptian police and security being killed by Brotherhood and affiliates, including how 104 policemen were killed in 1981, and how one officer was shot by them trying to save a boy's life.] The point is, we don't like bloodshed, neither our soldiers nor our officers. But when I see that you're firing at me, trying to kill me—well, I have to defend myself! Then the international news agencies go to these [Islamist] groups for information, and they tell them, "they're killing us, they're killing us!" Well, don't you [news agencies] see them killing the police?! I swear to you, not one of the police wants to kill them—not one of us. Then they say, "So Mr. President, you gave orders to the police to open fire indiscriminately?"—I cannot give such an order, at all. It contradicts the law. I could at one point be judged [for it].
Whatever one thinks of Hosni Mubarak—and his final assertion concerning himself is especially prophetic—he certainly understood the Brotherhood and their strategies well. Consider especially the following three points he made about them and how they have all proven true:
Finally, consider Mubarak's exchange with "a foreigner," most likely an American or European, who instantly interpreted Mubarak's "they'd attack each other" in Western political terms of "dialogue." This habit of projecting Western approaches onto Islamists—who ironically represent the antithesis of the West—is one of the chief problems causing the West to be blind to reality, which must ever and always be articulated through its own paradigm, one that insists that violence is always a product of political oppression and that Islamists are perpetually misunderstood victims.
In Egypt, however, one soon learns that, when "dialogue" doesn't go the Islamists' way, it's back to terrorism. This requires a more realistic approach, or, in the words of Mubarak, a man who, like his predecessors, especially Gamal Abdel Nasser, is intimately acquainted with the Brotherhood: "when I see that you're firing at me, trying to kill me—well, I have to defend myself!"
Raymond Ibrahim is author of Crucified Again: Exposing Islam's New War in Christians (published by Regnery in cooperation with Gatestone Institute, April 2013). He is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an associate fellow at the Middle East Forum. First published at Gatestone Institute and Middle East Forum.]]>
The Turkish criminal courts have increasingly been used to further Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's Islamist agenda through hate-speech prosecutions. The May 22 sentencing of Turkish-Armenian Sevan Nisanyan continues this disturbing trend of strangling political and social discourse.
Mr. Nisanyan is a man of many interests and talents. Linguist, journalist and hotel entrepreneur, Mr. Nisanyan is not only known for his guidebook to small, affordable hotels in Turkey, but also was awarded the 2004 Freedom of Thought Award by Turkey's Human Rights Association for advocating the open discussion on the Armenian genocide. In 2008, he authored "The Mistaken Republic: 51 Questions about Ataturk and Kemalism," arguing that Turkey's founder, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, established a fascist dictatorship under the guise of nationalism. Mr. Nisanyan continues to frequently publish witty critical posts against the authoritarian bodies of the Turkish government on his blog, often with direct critiques on the Erdogan regime.
Following the worldwide protests last September by Muslims enraged by the release of the satirical YouTube film "The Innocence of Muslims," Mr. Nisanyan argued in a Sept. 29 post that such discourse should not be criminalized. While mocking Muhammad is "ugly," it does not constitute a "hate crime." Putting emphasis on the distinction, Mr. Nisanyan wrote:
"Mocking an Arab leader — who claimed that he contacted God hundreds of years ago and who gained political, financial and sexual profit from this — is not a hate crime. Almost at the level of kindergarten, it is a test case of the thing called 'freedom of expression.'"
Mr. Nisanyan subsequently explained that his 377-word posting was spawned by Mr. Erdogan's uproar over "that cheapo Muhammad film" and his demand that the West recognize "Islamophobia as a crime against humanity."
The post not only prompted 15 separate criminal complaints, but Deputy Prime Minister Bekir Bozdag, an Erdogan confidant, called on prosecutors to launch an investigation. Breeching the sovereignty of the Turkish judiciary, he declared, "I'm announcing a crime. This is a typical hate crime. It is a hate crime, and it is a crime that is defined in our penal code."
On Oct. 15, Mr. Nisanyan appeared on CNN Turk's "Contrary to the Questions" to discuss the "The Innocence of Muslims" riots and the Turkish government's denouncements of the film. The Supreme Board of Radio and Television fined the private broadcast on the grounds that Mr. Nisanyan's comments "insulted the Prophet Muhammad," "exceeded the boundaries of freedom of expression" and were "insulting and injurious" to society.
In April, a month before Mr. Nisanyan's trial, world-renowned pianist Fazil Say was handed a 10-month suspended jail sentence under Article 216(3) for tweets made in jest about a call to prayer and heaven. On April 15, European Union foreign-policy chief Catherine Ashton's office criticized Mr. Say's sentence, calling for Turkey "to fully respect freedom of expression." Three days later, Mr. Bozdag defended the conviction because Mr. Say "was swearing at someone's values," and "[n]obody should confuse freedom of thought with freedom of swearing."
With both Mr. Bozdag's public declaration of Mr. Nisanyan's guilt and endorsement of the Say verdict, combined with the radio-TV board's ruling, Mr. Nisanyan could not expect an impartial trial. Prosecuted under Turkish Criminal Code Article 216(3), which declares, "Any person who openly disrespects the religious belief of a group is punished with imprisonment from six months to one year if such act causes potential risk for public peace," the magistrate judge of course found Mr. Nisanyan guilty, sentencing him to a 13-month prison sentence, six weeks beyond the statutorily permissible punishment.
Currently appealing his conviction in the Court of Cessation, Mr. Nisanyan will have to serve the entire jail sentence should the magistrate's sentence be upheld. The sentence violates the European Convention on Human Rights' Article 6 (right to a fair trial) and Article 10 (freedom of expression). Mr. Nisanyan's next best course is an appeal with the European Court of Human Rights.
Reporters Without Borders immediately condemned the sentence as a "grave violation of freedom of information" and called for the immediate repeal of the "draconian" Article 216(3), which "has no place in a secular country such as Turkey."
While the Turkish government is secular, the Erdogan regime is not. Following his narrow 2002 victory, Mr. Erdogan declared, "Secularism is the protector of all beliefs and religions. We are the guarantors of this secularism, and our management will clearly prove that." Now in the 11th year of his rule, Mr. Erdogan has abandoned any moderate facade.
Neither the State Department nor any EU agency has issued a statement about Mr. Nisanyan's plight. At this critical juncture, human rights organizations should file appeals on his behalf in the European Court of Human Rights. It is imperative that the international community become engaged; otherwise, opinions will continue to be criminalized by the Erdogan regime.
Sam Nunberg serves as director of the Legal Project, an activity of the Middle East Forum.First published at The Washington Times and The Legal Project.]]>
A Muslim student's vandalization of a university seminar's cartoon exhibit at the Universität Duisburg-Essen (UDE) in Germany's Ruhr region has once again manifested Islamic intolerance of critical commentary and independent intellectual inquiry. The affair's aftermath, moreover, sadly shows yet again how democratic public authorities are often less than vigilant in defending freedom against the encroachments of Muslim faith.
The controversy began with the exhibit "What comics can do – Recent trends in graphic fiction," opened by UDE's Department of Anglophone Studies (DAS) on May 23, 2013, in the university library. In the exhibit department students used posters to analyze the cartoon genre Graphic Novels. The students examined 14 of these novels in which book-length cartoon series treat mature subject matter.
One of the Graphic Novels examined in collage posters was Habibi, a tale of child (sex) slaves in Muslim Arab society by the award-winning American graphic novelist Craig Thompson. As the Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung (WAZ) reported, this widely available, 2011 published book has aroused no indication "of being orient-hostile." Thompson himself in a 2011 Germaninterview described Habibi as "among other things a reaction to the increasing Islamophobia in the United States after 2001."
A Muslim doctoral student, though, complained to library personnel multiple times that the UDE student poster presenting Habibi hurting her "religious feelings." The Habibi collage showed a rape scene from the book juxtaposed next to the word "Allah" in Arabic calligraphy along with an English-text explanation. The doctoral student, who had previously obtained notoriety by devoting one of her class presentations to "Allah," finally took it down on June 17, 2013.
The following June 24, the doctoral candidate used scissors to cut out part of a poster analyzing the award-winning graphic novel Exit Wounds by Israeli Rutu Modan. The destroyed book scene, viewable above and in a July 10, 2013 story by Berlin's left-wing Tageszeitung (TAZ), showed Israeli peace rally participants packing their bags with three signs inscribed with "Stop the Occupation" in Arabic, English, and Hebrew. TAZ author Pascal Beucker speculated that the doctoral student's anger derived from seeing the Arabic language depicted in the much-hated Israel. "It is more than probable," Beucker suggested in an earlier TAZ article, that the Muslim student had an "anti-Israeli, if not anti-Semitic motive," given that Exit Wounds deals with the Palestinian terror threat faced by Israelis. The UDE student government publication ak[due]ll, in contrast, countered TAZ, stating that library director Albert Bilo explained to the student senate that the Muslim student took offense at what she considered as a depiction of a sign with "Allah" on it going into the trash.
The vandalism led to a premature closing of the exhibit, described on its website as scheduled to last until the end of July but in various press accounts as only lasting a few more days. DAS also took down an exhibit Internet posting. DAS managing director Christoph Heyl stated that he wanted to avoid any impression of acquiescing in partial censorship. Moreover, Heyl cited a desire to protect the involved students and normal operations of the library. Security concerns at the university could be particularly acute, as that WAZ noted that over one-third of UDE's student population comes from an immigrant background.
Yet although UDE social sciences dean Dirk Hartmann understood in a July 7, 2013 WAZ story that security concerns prompted the exhibit's closing in a "heated atmosphere," he complained that UDE had not yet taken legal action against the perpetrator. Hartmann considered her "active repression of freedom" to be "unacceptable." Likewise, an internal DAS letter to UDE rector Ulrich Radtke considered the affair's academic freedom implications "scandalous."
UDE's student government (Allgemeiner Studierenden-Ausschuss or AStA) similarly expressed "concern and astonishment" at the exhibit closure. A July 10 Beucker TAZ editorial as well judged university refusal to resume display of the posters as a "scandalous act of self-censorship." The conservative Christian Democrats (CDU) and libertarian Free Democrats (FDP) in Essen's city government also expressed disappointment at the exhibit's premature end, proposing thereby that Essen's city hall exhibit the posters.
A July 3, 2013 UDE press release on the affair, meanwhile, emphasized in the words of Radtke that a university could not tolerate "thought prohibitions." After the doctoral student refused to meet university officials, UDE lodged a criminal complaint on July 10. "Whoever violates hard won basic rights like freedom of opinion and scholarship," Radtke stated, "must count on serious consequences with us." Radtke apologized for the delay in bringing charges for property destruction, citing a prudent desire to become fully informed of the case. Already on July 1 the Essen lawyer Marc Grünebaum had brought charges in light of this "attack upon freedom of opinion and art by a religious fanatic," his letter to authorities stated.
Yet the release stated that Islamic scholars would nonetheless examine how the posters might have offended Muslim sensibilities. Beucker's editorial deemed this step "ludicrous," as it "implied that there could be a substantial justification for the censorship." A less than resounding defense of freedom also came from Ali Nuhi, chair of UDE's Islamic Student Union (Islamischer Studierendenbund or ISB). Citing UDE Muslim sentiment against the Habibi collage, Nuhi stated that "it was a good sign that the poster was not hung up again." The two contributions of ak[due]ll on the affair, meanwhile, saw in the matter a need to discuss "anti-Muslim racism." Such is Germany's uncertain chorus of freedom as the posters remain concealed from view pursuant to the perpetrator's original heckler's veto.
First published at Frontpage Magazine and The Legal Project.]]>

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Over the plains of Armenia towers Mount Ararat, on which, the Bible states, Noah's Ark rested after the flood. Here also is the traditional site of the Garden of Eden, and the four rivers that Genesis describes as rising in the Garden still flow through the land. Sitting astride an arm of the Silk Route, Armenia has been invaded and occupied at various times by Assyria, Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and the Seljuk Turks, to name but a few. In the fifth century, Armenia… (more)
Publisher: Abela Publishing (December 02, 2010)
Format: EPUB
Page count: 288 pages
File size: 26.9 MB
Protection: DRM
Language: English


text:
Intel Says No MeeGo Handsets Until 2011
Nokia has no comment.
Forbes reports that a mobile device with MeeGo natively installed won't ship until the first half of 2011. Doug Fisher, Vice President of Intel's Software and Solutions Group and General Manager of Intel's System Software Division said in a recent interview that a MeeGo-powered device might debut at a large trade show in early 2011, quelling any rumors that an official MeeGo phone might make a debut at this year's inaugural MeeGo Conference in Dublin.
MeeGo tablets are also scheduled to appear in 2011, save the German-made WeTab by Neofonie, which is available for preorder now and slated to launch later this year.
Intel's development partner Nokia has stayed silent on the delay, which isn't entirely surprising considering the recent shakeups in management. Recently, MeeGo Device VP Ari Jaaksi left the company for undisclosed reasons.
Still Fisher is confident in the operating system's road map. Saying that MeeGo has been hitting its dates, some of them early. Later this month MeeGo 1.1 will become available, which includes additional telephony and touch support for tablets and smartphones.
Currently, Nokia is the only company onboard to produce MeeGo devices. But Intel is currently in talks with other OEMs.
Issue 190/2016
Buy this issue as a PDF
Mirantis Joins Hands with SUSE To Offer RHEL Support; Red Hat Not Happy
Competitors get in the game with RHEL without Red Hat
Linux on Windows 10 Poses a Security Risk
Security researchers have already notified Microsoft; some fixes are available
Mirantis to Refactor OpenStack Fuel for Kubernetes
The company is collaborating with Google and Intel to use Kubernetes as an engine for Fuel
Canonical Joins Document Foundation Advisory Board
The upcoming release of LibreOffice will be available as a snap package
SUSE Joins the Microsoft Test Drive Program
Customers can take a free test drive of SLES for HPC on the Azure Cloud
SiFive Launches a Line of Open Source Chips
San Francisco-based chip company announces their first fully open source chip platform.
Fedora 24 Released
The whole distro gets rebuilt on glibc 2.3
Canonical Announces Cross-Distro Support for Snaps
Ubuntu Vendor tries to solve app packaging and distribution problem across distributions.
ownCloud Forked
Founder of ownCloud launches the Nextcloud project.
HP Enterprise Unveils a Futuristic Computer
Will The Machine change the way future programmers think about memory?


text:
- Report: #355848
Report - Rebuttal - Arbitrate
Complaint Review: Mags4cheap
Mags4cheap851 Dairy-Ashford Houston, Texas U.S.A.
Mags4cheap.com Christmas Ripoff - bought a subscription as a Christmas gift and never received it. When you try calling all you get is voicemail that someone will return my call. No one ever has. Houston Texas
Ripoff Report
About you?
Ripoff Report
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..
Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™
I then tried emailing and did get responses that way from Brian Gibbs - who has informed me in more responses than I can count that the check is in the mail, that it goes 3rd class mail and can take up to 20 days to get, and that he personally went to the accounting dept and had them submit the check and he mailed it. Phew - that was months ago.
I then requested the information of the person running mags4cheap, at which time I was informed that he could not give out that information for Upper Management. I then requested that he give "Upper Management" my information and have them contact me - well now he doesn't even respond to my emails any more. Unfortunately getting on this site, I see that I am not an isolated case.
Blue Ridge Summit, Pennsylvania
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 07/26/2008 07:46 AM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/Mags4cheap/Houston-Texas-77079/Mags4cheapcom-Christmas-Ripoff-bought-a-subscription-as-a-Christmas-gift-and-never-rece-355848. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.
Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.
Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on Mags4cheap
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:Search Tips
In order to assure the best results in your search:
- Keep the name short & simple, and try different variations of the name.
- Do not include ".com", "S", "Inc.", "Corp", or "LLC" at the end of the Company name.
- Use only the first/main part of a name to get best results.
- Only search one name at a time if Company has many AKA's.
Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.


text:
- Report: #690111
Report - Rebuttal - Arbitrate
Complaint Review: Arianna Swanson
Arianna SwansonInternet United States of America
Arianna Swanson Arianna Blake craigslist, tv, scam, united kingdom, Wolverhampton Internet
Ripoff Report
About you?
Ripoff Report
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..
Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™
She's at it again! Found a Sony 46" LCD on craigslist for $300 so I contacted the seller. Like the other person, Ms. Arianna (the seller) claims to have had to move toWolverhampton,United Kingdom. She supposedly is now the Chief Logistics Officer for a company called Bluechip Removals (www.bluechipremovals.co.uk).
She replied back saying the TV is available and that she can ship it using a 3rd party company called TNT. She even offed to pay 2 day express overseas shipping at her cost (how nice!). While TNT (TNT.com) appears a legitimate company the link she provides (http://ukdepots-tnt.com/tnt.express.wolverhampton.depot.overseas.transactions/) is not the same company.
When she stated she had to move to the UK, I was concerned. But after getting her last email with the link provided I knew something was wrong. Thankfully I ran a google to check the legitmacy of her claim and found this report, so she has received no money from me!
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 02/02/2011 08:03 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/Arianna-Swanson/internet/Arianna-Swanson-Arianna-Blake-craigslist-tv-scam-united-kingdom-Wolverhampton-Internet-690111. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.
Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.
Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on Arianna Swanson
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:Search Tips
In order to assure the best results in your search:
- Keep the name short & simple, and try different variations of the name.
- Do not include ".com", "S", "Inc.", "Corp", or "LLC" at the end of the Company name.
- Use only the first/main part of a name to get best results.
- Only search one name at a time if Company has many AKA's.
Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.


text:
GRANTS PASS, Ore. — The mandatory 5-percent budget cuts known as sequestration will not apply to next month's federal subsidy checks to timber counties.
Sen. Ron Wyden and Rep. Peter DeFazio announced Monday that determination came from the White House Office of Management and Budget.
Oregon timber counties are to share $100 million from Wyden's Secure Rural Schools Act subsidies. The checks go out in January to cover the period ending last Sept. 30. Earlier payments were cut by sequestration. It was not immediately clear what led to the change.
The program makes up for cuts in federal timber revenues paid to counties since logging was cut back on federal lands in the 1990s to protect fish and wildlife. Since then, automation has further reduced Oregon timber jobs, and counties have struggled.
Location, ST | website.com


text:
Sock Dreams
We offer FREE USPS shipping on all US orders!
back to » home » sock journal index
RSS feed
« Older Entries | Newer Entries »
by niqkita
October 19th, 2009
Friday Night: Grand Opening Event!!!
You're all invited!!!
Where: Sock Dreams shop in Sellwood
8005 SE 13th Avenue, Portland, OR 97202
When: Friday October 23rd, 6-8 pm
Since it is nearly Halloween we're encouraging everyone to come dressed up with a chance to win a $100 Sock Dreams Gift Certificate for the best costume.* We'll be offering 25% off all sales during the party (discount good only at the event).
There will be treats & goodies thanks to our neighbors at:
The Ugly Mug & Grand Central Bakery.
This will be a family friendly event with entertainment: a girl who is a stilt walker, hula hooper, fire dancer and can swallow fire. Banjo, trumpet, and other live music.
by niqkita
September 13th, 2009
Moving Day
So far today is much like any other Sunday…
I'm editing images shot earlier in the week and will soon head over to our warehouse to help pull the first batch of orders for the day. Our store on Powell will open at 11 am just like it has nearly every day since April 1st 2008.
But today, unlike other days, when the last of the shoppers have left the building we'll gather up all the socks & pretty things and our neighbors at the All American Moving Co will transport all of our shop furniture & boxes of socks over to Sellwood and into our new shop location.
Read more »
by niqkita
April 3rd, 2009
One Year Open
This week marks the one year anniversary of having a walk-in sock shop
…and a brilliant year it's been too. It was never my plan to open a store, just to have a fun website that I could run from home in my spare time. As the years passed, nearly nine of them already, I needed more and more help as sales grew and grew.
We outgrew our spaces every two years until we got a nice big warehouse in the heart of southeast Portland with a perfect area for a shop in the entry way. It's a tiny little shop that doesn't always meet people's expectations of somewhere called Sock Dreams because it can be maddening to know that "the entire Sock Dreams warehouse is right on the other side of the curtain" as one person described it, yet you are limited to the selection we have chosen for the store area (though we are always willing to find what you seek in our warehouse, we can't actually let the public roam freely back there any more than Willy Wonka could let folks roam his factory). The very same girls run our shop that help us pull orders out in the warehouse in the morning and I make a point to work with them all so that I am sure they share my vision and love for socks. No doubt we'll outgrow this space as our little shop has been far more popular than I ever imagined so we're sort of on the look out for a second space nearby. Somewhere we can have more socks than even our most wwwoted sock brethren expect us to have, with spaces to try tryable things on, and lots of other fun stuff nearby for those who have traveled long and far to find us to enjoy.
And once again I find myself thanking all of you, near and far, who have helped make this journey such a joy and this dream so vivid. Whether you have only bought one pair of socks, told just one friend, or spread the word to anyone who will listen, my fellow Sock Dreamers and I are forever grateful!
by niqkita
December 20th, 2008
Socks in the Snow
It has snowed every day for nearly a week now with more due.
This being our busiest week online I was grateful for everyone braving the elements every day to keep the socks flowing out our door & into your homes.
Saturday was the last big day for shipping, and the forecast calls for freezing rain and ice so I announced first thing Saturday morning that Sunday is a snow day for us, no one will be working in our warehouse and our store will be closed. Yes, this should be a huge weekend for our store, not in the ice though, the roads will not be safe, the news keeps telling us so. Stay home if you were gonna come see us because we're not there.
Don't worry, we will be back on Monday, all bundled up and ready to go…
If you need your socks by Wednesday they best be shipped 2 day express, or picked up at our store, we'll be there til 4 on Wednesday. Well, we won't actually be there personally, our vacation starts after we get caught up on Monday!!! But we'll have plenty of Sock Dreamers on hand to get you your socks & other dreamy goodies.
Happy Winter Solstice!!!
by niqkita
May 22nd, 2008
I've got a Golden Ticket
and oh-so-much more!!!
the black & gold fishnets are a sneak peak at the Betsey Johnson Metallic Magic Fishnet Shorties. Our full order just arrived today and will be live shortly…
The shoes? I found those on Etsy, hand painted by Hippy of Doom.
Lovely, I absolutely adore them, especially with these socks.
Oh, how I adore Betsey Johnson and her sexy styles!!!
When Raubynn & I went to Seattle last month I brought these along with way too many others, if only we'd had a whole week for taking pictures! these were my fav's, the fishnet capris were just stunning! oh, and wait til you see the Grrr Fishnets!
They are subtle and were tricky to get a decent shot of. I loved how they looked and fit, really nice fishnet that felt great on and the pattern was evenly printed all over without gaps, overlaps or mismatches.
« Older Entries | Newer Entries »


text:
Natasha Watkins
Natasha is an experienced Tarot Reader and Tarot Teacher with a life long passion in Metaphysics. She specializes in Tarot, Numerology, Chinese Astrology, Feng Shui, Space Clearing, Spellwork and "The Law of Attraction". Her goal is to empower her clients by providing them knowledge, so they can make the best choices for moving forward in their lives. Natasha runs classes for Beginners, Intermediate & Advanced Tarot in Mont Albert and the CBD, as well as offering courses by Correspondence and Remote Readings.
Mont Albert & CBD
Phone number:
0413 777 378
Email Address:


text:
How can i Display Page icon on home page with page name.
As am showing few important pages on home page with short description. is it possible that i can show assign icon along with page name on home page.
what is the code to call image icon file assign to particular page.


text:
A project of People For the American Way dedicated to monitoring and exposing the activities of the right-wing movement. Learn More >
Gallagher Weighs In On Lisa Miller Saga
The National Organization for Marriage's Maggie Gallagher has made no secret of the fact that she has "a suspicion of men who want to get close to children while depriving them of mothers."
And she also apparently has sympathy for mothers who flee with their children rather than abide by court orders, judging by this statement she made on the Lisa Miller/Janet Jenkins case:
In a Monday e-mail to CNA, Maggie Gallagher, president of the National Organization for Marriage, made general comments about the case.
"I have sympathy for the pre-eminent claims of natural parents versus legal parents, when the natural mother is a fit parent (which nobody has denied in this case). But we have to be a nation ruled by laws, even when those laws may be unjust.
"Let this act as a warning call: Don't enter civil unions with people if you do not want to give them legal rights over your children. And do not give much faith in the 'best interest of the child' standard to protect your child. If the best interest of the child conflicts with fashionable legal norms, courts will not care what is in your child's best interest.
"It cannot be in Lisa's daughter's interest to be forcibly moved to Vermont away from the only mother she has ever known. This case is a tragedy all around. I cannot endorse what Lisa Miller has done, but I understand it, and pity both women and most of all this child. I wish Lisa's partner had the wisdom of Solomon, but I cannot blame her either," Gallagher told CNA.
Filed Under
Organizations:National Organization for Marriage
People:Maggie Gallagher , Lisa Miller
Related Items
RWW Social Media
Most Popular
Pat Buchanan: If Trump Loses, There Could Be A Revolution
8/12/16 @ 3:45pm
David Barton: Christians Who Refuse To Vote For Donald Trump Will Have To Answer To God
8/10/16 @ 10:21am
Pat Robertson: Satan Inspires Liberals To Lie About Donald Trump (And Me)
8/10/16 @ 1:50pm
Trump: Church Attendance Will Rise When I'm President
8/11/16 @ 4:55pm
Rudy Giuliani: No Terrorist Attacks Occurred During The Bush Administration
8/15/16 @ 3:05pm


text:
Maroon 5 announce 2016 fall tour, Denver date
Adam Levine is the toast of the wildly famous talent show "The Voice." But when Levine isn't on television, the enigmatic lead vocalist is dropping top-40 mainstays on the FM dial.
Adam Levine is the toast of the wildly famous talent show "The Voice." But when Levine isn't on television, the enigmatic lead vocalist is dropping top-40 mainstays on the FM dial.
The term classic rock is appropriate to the triple bill of Tesla, Styx and Def Leppard because their greatest-hits catalog has served as the soundtrack of adolescence for most in attendance at the Pepsi Center on Saturday night.
When performing artists come to Denver, they often seem affected by the altitude and struggle to get through their set. Then there's Billy Joel. Though he turned 66 earlier this year, Joel's performances belie his age.
In 2009, after a heated argument that started over a text message from an ex-girlfriend, Chris Brown brutally attacked Rihanna, his then girlfriend. He put her in a headlock, choked her until she almost lost consciousness, bit her fingers and punched her repeatedly until her cries for help prompted a bystander to call 911.
A more self-assured and less awkward Taylor Swift than the one bolstered by over-the-top production numbers two years ago during her "RED" tour enthralled the sold-out crowd with her second night at the Pepsi Center on Sunday for the "1989" tour, and if her increased confidence is what's driving her desire to mentor young girls from the stage, well, awesome.
It is difficult to believe that Taylor Swift has been performing in Denver for 10 years – first playing cafes and clubs when she was just a teenager.
Ozzy Osbourne and his crew of misfits are running on fumes. However, their fumes are far more potent than that of the legendary heavy metal rockers' contemporaries.
Taylor Swift, America's musical sweetheart, is in full tour mode in support of her 2014 album "1989," and last night at L.A.'s Staples Center (part of a multi-night stint there) her attention-getting guest spots continued.
When you think about a hit, a bona-fide hit, you probably snap to the first "song of the summer" that comes across your memory machine: "Bang Bang?" "Uptown Funk?" You might not often consider that "obvious" group -- the artists that cranked out hits like they were making sandwiches, right?
My first concert ever was Rush at Radio City Music Hall in 1983, on a five-show run in between the band's "Signals" and "Grace Under Pressure" albums.
"It was magical ... and no one even broke a hip." Those words, overheard outside the Pepsi Center Sunday night, say so much. It was Neil Diamond night in Denver.
Bette Midler starts out her Pepsi Center show pleading old age. She makes fun of her own perseverance ("I'm like vodka," she jokes, "ageless, odorless and tasteless") and of all the gray hair in her audience ("I don't know if I should sing to you," she rants, "or talk to you about the advantages of a reverse mortgage").
If you're like me, and it's not impossible that you are, you grew up vaguely aware of Fleetwood Mac. You thought of the band's music as something primarily designed for parents, like chardonnay or station wagons.
In September of 2013, as Fleetwood Mac toured through the UK, Lindsey Buckingham got some news that he was convinced would never come. It was from his old bandmate, Christine McVie, who had left Fleetwood Mac in 1998 and moved back to England to live a quiet life in the countryside.
The band that was generous enough to give you their new album for free without you asking for it is generous enough to give you a second Denver show.
On Nov. 3rd, 1999, I watched Saturday Night Live. Garth Brooks was the host, and Chris Gaines -- Brooks' rock-star alter-ego -- was the musical guest.
Stevie Wonder opened the second leg of his "Songs in the Key of Life" tour at the Pepsi Center on Tuesday, continuing the celebration of his 1976 masterwork which would be played in its entirety, along with a few surprises.
Nicki Minaj has announced dates for the North American leg of her "Pinkprint Tour," and she'll be stopping in Denver this August. She'll be joined by a number of emerging hip-hop acts, including Meek Mill, Rae Sremmurd, Tinashe and Dej Loaf.
It's rare that the Pepsi Center can seem like a small venue for a band. And few others than U2 could make that happen. The band has announced that it will return to Denver to play the arena.
Stevie Wonder, Inner Oceans and more make our picks of the best Colorado shows this week. See you there, and if you don't make it out, follow our music musings on our Twitter @RVRB and our selfies on Instagram @heyreverb.
During his last tour stop in Colorado, Garth Brooks took the stage with a beeper clipped to his belt. It was the year 1996 and Brooks and his then-wife Sandy Mahl were expecting their third child.
Iggy Azalea must have some super fancy production for her upcoming arena tour. The artist has rescheduled her 2015 run "due to tour production delays," a news release says.
Shania Twain's first tour in 11 years will also be her last. In a year where Taylor Swift is the new queen of country, Twain has announced her farewell tour, which will stop at Denver's Pepsi Center on Aug.
With her new album out today, Kelly Clarkson has announced a 36-city U.S. tour that includes a stop at Denver's Pepsi Center this summer.
When Pitbull and Enrique Iglesias first announced their shared arena tour, critics nodded in agreement. "That makes sense," they thought, imagining the substantial shared catalogs and fanbases between the two Latino, Miami-rooted artists.


text:
"Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world."
AmeriLux International is a distributor and manufacturer of a broad range of plastic products used in the architectural market. Our offering includes multiwall and corrugated polycarbonate sheet products, PVC sheet and liner panels, and steel coil.
Citadel Architectural Products, Inc
CITADEL ARCHITECTURAL PRODUCTS, INC. is a manufacturer of cladding solutions including metal composite material (MCM), prefinished architectural wall panels and systems, and glazing infill panels.
Our mission is to produce an eco-friendly, appealing alternative to traditional window treatments, in a cost-effective, efficient and consumer-friendly design that easily retrofits or accommodates both existing and new commercial glazing applications.
To architects, building developers and owners, contractors, and the entire commercial glazing community, Oldcastle BuildingEnvelope is the leading supplier of products specified to close the building envelope. They include: custom-engineered curtain wall and window wall, architectural windows, storefront systems, doors, skylights and architectural glass.
Radiation Protection Products (RPP) manufactures and distributes a full line of radiation shielding products. They include doors (solid core wood, lead lined, and steel strapped), lead lined gypsum board and plywood, lead glass and acrylic, lead lined frames for borrowed lites and doors, pass boxes, and many other lead products.
Traco, a premier brand of windows, are a part of Kawneer company. Traco windows are designed to stay ahead of market challenges and create innovative solutions. The dynamic range of creative, high performing Traco windows and systems are ideal for both renovation and new construction project needs. Now, as a division of Kawneer - the strongest brand in the architectural systems market - and an important component of Alcoa's global Building and Construction Systems business, we are looking toward the promise of the future. A new era in windows is dawning. With Traco, the future just got brighter.


text: While the "evil twin" trope was already a television cliche by the time "The Enemy Within" came around, the episode put a fresh spin on the idea by having the evil twin actually be the dark side of the personality of the series' lead. The episode is certainly one of the darker-themed entries in the early first season, with effective direction by Leo Penn. Shatner turns in one of the greatest of his performances on the series, compellingly portraying both the "evil" and the "good" Kirk as recognizably distinct and different types. The raw elements of this episode work so well, as they do in the best episodes of TOS, that the viewer overlooks the absurdity of the central premise (that the transporter could seperate positive personality elements from negative ones.) The subplot of the stranded crewmen succeeds in adding tension to the central storyline. Moment you might miss if you're not paying close attention - when Scotty is discussing the transporter situation, and the inadvisability of bringing the stranded crew aboard, he says "They might all be duplicated like y-" and then quickly catches himself and says "Like the animal." No dummy, Scott has of course figured out the obvious origin of "the imposter".


text:
Notable Features
- USB input
- Standard electronic stability system
- Six airbags
- Standard ABS
- Many available accessories
- Available Engines:
- 128-hp, 1.8-liter I-4 (regular gas)
- Transmissions:
- 5-speed manual w/OD
- 4-speed automatic w/OD
Expert Snapshot
What We Like
- Lots of standard features
- Inventive styling
- Handling and braking
- Gas mileage
- Safety features
What We Don't Like
- Cargo dimensions
- Awkward backseat folding
- Turning circle
- Can't adjust driver's seat height
- Priced too close to better-equipped xB
2 Styles: View, Compare & Price
Standard Engine
See specs for optional engines
Base 4dr Hatchback
See Specs
128-hp, 1.8-liter I-4 (regular gas)
Release Series 3.0 4dr Hatchback
See Specs
128-hp, 1.8-liter I-4 (regular gas)
People Who Viewed this Car Also Viewed
Select up to three models to compare with the 2011 Scion xD.
Asking Price Range
Asking Price Range
Asking Price Range
Asking Price Range
Starting MSRP
Featured Services for this Scion xD
- Sell your current car quickly and easily on Cars.com.
- Not sure what auto repair should cost you? Use our price estimator.
- Get help with car repair now on Cars.com. Visit Repair & Care