The Islamic campaign to silence us

An interview from Sun News in Canada with Brooke Goldstein from The Lawfare Project which  is an organisation that fights for free speech against political censorship — especially from Islamic extremists.

interesting stuff, especially with regards to the recent EU decision about Hamas and UN actions.  

What is “Lawfare”?

“Lawfare is not something in which persons engage in the pursuit of justice, and must be defined as a negative phenomenon to have any real meaning. Otherwise, we risk diluting the threat and feeding the inability to distinguish between that which is the correct application of the law, on the one hand, and that which is lawfare, on the other. Because that is the essence of the issue here: how do we distinguish between that which constitutes a constructive, legitimate legal battle (even if the legal battle is against us and inconvenient) from that which is a counterproductive perversion of the law, which should be allocated no precedent? The delineation is not as simple as some may like to make it; that is, that lawsuits against terrorists are good, and legal actions against democracies are bad. The question is not ‘Who is the target?’ but ‘What is the intention?’ behind the legal action: Is it to pursue justice, to apply the law in the interests of freedom and democracy, or is the intent to undermine the very system of laws being manipulated?”

 – Brooke Goldstein, Director, The Lawfare Project

Lawfare denotes “the use of the law as a weapon of war”** or, more specifically, the abuse of Western laws and judicial systems to achieve strategic military or political ends.

It consists of the negative manipulation of international and national human rights laws to accomplish purposes other than, or contrary to, those for which they were originally enacted.

Lawfare is also evident in the manipulation of domestic legal systems (by state and non-state parties) to implement laws inconsistent with general principles of liberal democracy.

The principles underlying lawfare are also present in glaring failures to apply human rights law and in the disproportionate and biased application of the law.

Modern-day lawfare has five goals:

     1. To silence and punish free speech about issues of national security and public concern;

     2. To delegitimize the sovereignty of democratic states;

     3. To frustrate and hinder the ability of democracies to fight against and defeat terrorism;

     4. To confuse laws of armed conflict with human rights law; and

     5. To prevent the application of human rights law in situations where it is needed the most.

These goals are interconnected – any one instance of lawfare may serve to achieve more than one of the aims listed above.


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • rua kenana

    It always struck me as wryly amusing that the MainStreamMedia automatically categorizes persons opposed to excessive immigration on whatever grounds as “far right extremists” (frequently racist and xenophobic as well) while islamic extremists are generally encouraged (apart from the occasional “shock, horror” type headline) in their “freedom of religious expression”.
    Just lazy journalism? Or maybe something worse?

    • kloyd0306

      Because a large majority of journalists have been/were indoctrinated by left-leaning, liberal university professors who have never lived in the real world of running a business and making payroll.

    • Coffee Connoisseur

      quite ironic given that excessive immigration hs a real world effect of putting downward pressure on wages in an economy and anyone against it could easily be argued to have a left wing view on the matter.

  • JC

    Duncan Garner goes the full Monty to convince us the Sydney terrorist was just a “deluded madman, turned monster”.. nothing to do with the Religion of Peace.

    Don’t these people ever notice that these madmen are so often Islamists and that the religion is a shining beacon to the mad and the bad?


    • wooted

      Imagine the outrage if the guy had had even a vague connection with a right of centre political party.

    • Skydog

      Does anyone remember if Andre Brevik (Norwegian mass killer) was ever labelled a terrorist? I believe the madman in Sydney was a terrorist but was Brevik labelled one as well? Just a thought not any denial.

      • Rick H

        I understand he has been found “Not to be insane”.
        His problem, though, was that he targeted the “middle men” and not the islamists he was railing against.
        The Labour Party had been allowing in a heap of islamist “refugees”, so he targeted them because of their folly.

        On his own mind, he believed he was acting for the good of the country, and probably wonders why he isn’t now a hero.

  • Lawfare in tandem with apathy of the masses will likely be our slow, insidious downfall as a “free” sovereign nation…

  • Citizen

    Perfect. Any debate against Islam, and you’re labelled a racist. Hate preachers in the UK, using free speech less to continue their tirade for sharia law, which subjugates free speech. In NZ the killing of a kiwi who was caught by a drone strike whilst hanging out with the taliban, was described by some as an extrajudicial killing..The world is turned on its head, abetted by the media.

    • Dumrse

      Surely that’s “aided and abetted” by the media.

  • dgrogan

    We already see this same thing happening here. When people speak out on discriminatory immigration issues – for example limiting immigration from the ME, or countries where sharia law has a foothold – they are slapped down by the PC brigade.

    Edit: Typo

    • Ah, but that is how the PC trolls and SJW identify themselves. Besides, screeching about it being unfair means nothing when you have people dying across the Tasman. Key and Little are aware of the risk: the fact that Labour is not playing political football implies it is serious,
      The SJW and PC trolls? Feed them not.

  • dgrogan

    Radical Islam exploits our inbuilt ‘sense of justice’.

    ‘Justice’ is a human construct, which has no other place in the world. Scientists have identified a region of our brain that curbs natural self-interest, so that we censure and dish out punishment to people seen to be behaving unfairly – even if it is not in our own best interests to do so.

    Living in an open and tolerant society, we have enacted laws which enshrine this ‘sense of justice’. For example, we censure and punish those who discriminate on the grounds of race, religion, creed, age, gender, sexual orientation etc. We have set up a Human Rights Commission for the promotion and protection of these human rights in this country.

    So what happens when we identify a pernicious religion [a supremacist ideology, which preaches hatred, persecution and hostility to all ‘un-believers] as holy unsuitable for inclusion in our open and fair society. I refer to teachings of Mohammed, as practiced by radical Islamists.

    What we need to do is call these barbaric Islamist thugs out and take steps to see that New Zealand immediately ceases to encourage immigration from the Middle East and any countries where Sharia Law already has a foothold.

    However, in even raising this issue for public debate, we’ll be bludgeoned by the PC brigade, wielding their Human Rights legislation cudgel.

    In the very act of shutting down such a debate however, we offer radical Islamists the opportunity to exploit our weakness for a fair go for all.

  • kloyd0306

    During the Martin Pl siege, Aust Fox had a respected Muslim elder as a guest commenting on the hostage scene as it was taking place.
    The perpetrator’s name was not known by the public but the elder DID know in advance, describing him as “someone known to us”.
    The Muslim community KNEW this guy BEFORE we knew.
    Therein lies a major problem.
    When will the Muslim community self-police?
    I’m not holding my breath…….

  • MAWG

    The issue surrounding “Lawfare” as I see it, is that certain people within the judiciary, and in Parliament, are assisting people in carrying out these aims, oblivious to the fact that they are “aiding the enemy”, for want of a better term.

    The fact that Sony has kowtowed to forces threatening terrorist acts will no doubt emboldened those who would carry out similar acts. In showing weakness, Sony has weakened us all.