[scandium]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

No. JihadWatch promotes awareness.

To promote hysteria, maybe someone needs to institutionalize it.

You still don't get it. It's as if the Dhimmi Watch sidebar's text was written with you in mind:

• Why Dhimmi Watch?
  
  Dhimmitude is the status that Islamic law, the Sharia, mandates for non-Muslims, primarily Jews and Christians. Dhimmis, "protected people," are free to practice their religion in a Sharia regime, but are made subject to a number of humiliating regulations designed to enforce the Qur'an's command that they "feel themselves subdued" (Sura 9:29). This denial of equality of rights and dignity remains part of the Sharia, and, as such, is part of the law that global jihadists are laboring to impose everywhere, ultimately on the entire human race.
  
  The dhimmi attitude of chastened subservience has entered into Western academic study of Islam, and from there into journalism, textbooks, and the popular discourse. One must not point out the depredations of jihad and dhimmitude; to do so would offend the multiculturalist ethos that prevails everywhere today.
  
  But in this era of global terrorism this silence and distortion has become deadly. Therefore Dhimmi Watch seeks to bring public attention to the plight of the dhimmis, and by doing so, to bring them justice.
  
  More...

This is the part I have trouble with: This denial of equality of rights and dignity remains part of the Sharia, and, as such, is part of the law that global jihadists are laboring to impose everywhere, ultimately on the entire human race.

That's the stuff that tinfoil hats are made of. As to the article on the attempt to create a Muslim world court, I found this commentary from the Jijhadwatch authors amusing:

But what is noteworthy, alongside the proposal of a world Islamic court, is the extent to which responsibility is displaced: Not only are Western nations to blame for the problems of the Muslim world, but now the entire UN is just a tool of the West. And the IMF. And the World Bank.

Its amusing because the UN, the IMF, and the World Bank were created by the West and there is no question who disportionately benefits. Consider the UN: who holds veto power? The US, Russia, Germany, France and the UK - what's that if its not the West AL? And what have those vetoes been used for? Well in the US (to quote Wiki): "The USA first used the veto power in 1970, regarding a crisis in Rhodesia, and first issued a lone veto in 1972, to prevent a resolution censuring Israel. Since that time, it has become by far the most frequent user of the veto, mainly against resolutions criticising Israel (see Negroponte doctrine). This has been a constant cause of friction between the General Assembly and the Security Council." But given the ongoing hostility between various Muslim countries and Israel we can ignore this, since it doesn't fit with the Jihadwatch slant that there might be even an ounce of legitimacy in their claims .

And of the 3 the UN is the most "impartial" (such as it is) and universally represented, so that says little for the IMF and World Bank. I don't know... maybe I wouldn't mind Jihadwatch if they weren't so hysterical and stupidly (like black is white stupid) slanted in their potrayal of things from the potentially meaningful to the trite and meaningless - the latter seeming to be their specialty.