The World Muslim League (WML) reported on Denmark’s changing their speech laws to conform to Islamic legal standards
1) Umma. On December 10, 2023, on the social media platform “XLinks to an external site.,” the World Muslim League (WML) reported on Denmark’s changing their speech laws to conform to Islamic legal standards:
The Muslim World League has welcomed the decision of the Parliament of the Kingdom of Denmark to ban the “inappropriate treatment of texts of significant religious importance to recognized religious communities,” and to punish those who commit such acts. This decision comes in the wake of disgraceful crimes that have led to the desecration of copies of the Holy Quran
In a statement by the General Secretariat of the MWL, His Excellency Sheikh Dr. Mohammed bin Abdulkarim Al-Issa, Secretary-General of the MWL and Chairman of the Organization of Muslim Scholars, confirmed that this is a step that merits appreciation and praise. He expressed hope that this measure would contribute to ending the shameful desecration of religious sanctities and the repeated provocation of the sentiments of believers.
His Eminence stressed that the Danish Parliament’s decision reinforces the correct and civilized concepts of freedom of expression, and contributes to eliminating barriers that disturb harmony within national communities embroiled in these disturbing conflicts.
Furthermore, His Eminence emphasized that the decision of the representatives of the Danish people represents a turning of a new page, one moving away from a past full of tension. Moreover, it represents a wise move in the right direction for our interconnected world. It promotes friendship and cooperation among nations and peoples, countering slogans and practices that incite conflict and civilizational clashes.
2) Umma. In a “Breaking” release on December 9, 2023, on the social media platform TelegramLinks to an external site., Turkey’s official press service, Anadolu Agency, reported on Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s comments:
‘They (West) legitimized, approved, encouraged actions against Islam, Muslims under pretext of freedom’: Turkish President Erdogan
Turkish president says UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights is being blatantly violated in Gaza, occupied Palestinian territories
‘A just world is possible, but not with the United States. How will the US be held accountable?’: Turkish President Erdogan
3) Dawah. On December 8, 2023, a second-tier online news outlet, Gateway PunditLinks to an external site., reported that the “President of CAIR Nihad Awad – Who is a Joe Biden ‘Partner’ on ‘Anti-Semitism’ – Cheers slaughter of 1,300 Jews in Southern Israel on Oct. 7 (Video).
A few observations:
From #1, there is praise from an Islamic entity of a European state when it conforms to its laws, as discussed in Lecture 3. Alongside that praise note how undertaking such action averted “civilizational clashes.”
From #2, bear in mind the “Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam,” as discussed in Lecture 3, when President Erdogan speaks of the “UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights” when stating they have been “blatantly violated.” Also, note his statement regarding the United States and the demand for accountability.
From #3, recall from Lecture 2 that CAIR was formed out of HAMAS, an organization still formally designated as a terrorist organization on the FTOLinks to an external site., and determined to be linked to HAMAS / the Muslim Brotherhood as determined by the Holy Land Foundation case. Also, recall from Lecture 3 how Turkish President Erdogan met with domestic Islamic Movement leaders, including CAIR leader Nihad Awad and USCMO leader Ousamma Jammal.
The Assessment.
address the entities identified and their relationship to each other. Included in this assessment, please address the political warfare implications of international organizations or foreign sovereign leaders driving activities within the United States. Discuss how language praising actions to “avoid civilizational clashes” or calls to hold the “US accountable” can be interpreted as threats or calls for downstream actions, including violence, possibly terrorism. In doing so, address whether the higher-level organizations making such statements can be understood to constitute direction in a command relationship (are they orders)? If so, could these implied or real calls for action be understood to constitute terrorism? Finally, if organizations like the OIC or the WML play such a prominent role in the understanding of events, why is their existence virtually unknown among those responsible for accounting for them?
