The bogus narrative of “Muslims are the victims of Muslim terrorism” has kicked up a notch with France banning protests against Islam.  In the wake of the Muslim terrorist Charlie Hebdo attacks in Paris earlier this month, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is seeking to take a major step in Muslim progressivism.  Almost singularly focused, the OIC has been attempting to criminalize criticism of Islam for years; it’s what they did in the wake of the 2005 Danish cartoons; it’s what they did in the wake of the 2012 Benghazi attacks; and it’s what they’re doing now. The OIC is patient but determined to make this happen.  The result of all of this is that the European Union is now being presented with proposals to ban Islamophobia, so as to stem a perceived backlash against Muslims. Eurocrats are sympathetic but do not believe they are practicable. Diplomatic and NGO sources in Brussels say that the European Union is now considering proposals from Muslim groups to strengthen laws against “hate speech” following the fatal attacks in Paris at the Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine and a Jewish Supermarket.  The proposals are based on fears that the attacks by Islamists could provoke a backlash against Europe’s growing Muslim community, leaders of which uniformly condemned the killings, while simultaneously protesting against denigration of Muhammed.  Mainstream Muslim leaders have close contacts with the European Union and its related institutions, as do the leaders of other faith groups. The sources, consulted in the last two days, who insisted upon anonymity, said that senior EU officials were sympathetic to calls for libel and hate-speech laws to be strengthened, but were sceptical of getting support from member governments or from the European Parliament where Right-leaning parties increased their presence at last year’s European elections.  One well-informed member of a non-governmental orgainsation in Brussels said:
The conversation is going on. In fact, it’s the only game in town after Paris. But you aren’t going to get anyone to go on the record right now. Everyone’s too scared, and I don’t mean scared of the Islamists, I mean scared of being accused of being politically correct, even if they are.  
The Jewish groups are terrrified, but let’s face it, how many Jews are there in Europe against the number of Muslims? But, yes, they are considering a ban on Islamophobia.  
That part about EU politicians being scared of being perceived as politically correct is significant. Political correctness is something everyone claims to despise but yet, so many of the world’s leaders fervently practice it and no one can really identify its source.  Opinion polls show that the majority of European Union Muslims want Sharia law for their communities, but do not believe that that should extend to the non-Muslim majority. However, they do believe that insulting the Muslim Prophet should be against the law.  In 2003, the EU suppressed a report on anti-Semitism in Europe which concluded that attacks on Jews were mainly perpetrated by young Muslims. The fact that such a conversation was even occurring, is an indication of just what is really meant by ‘the ride never ends’. It would be nice if we knew the names of the persons who have been actually considering helping the Islamic agenda after the Paris attacks. It would be nice to know the names of these traitors.
When it comes to the OIC’s efforts to criminalize speech critical of Islam, the origins of political correctness trace back to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on July 15, 2011. While in Istanbul, Turkey, Hillary was one of three co-chairs (then OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu and current Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu). In her speech at that meeting, which was specifically intended to kick off a process that would work toward what we’re seeing in the EU after the Paris attacks, Hillary said this about a recent United Nations Resolution upon which the Istanbul meeting was based:
The resolution calls upon states to protect freedom of religion, to counter offensive expression through education, interfaith dialogue, and public debate, and to prohibit discrimination, profiling, and hate crimes, but not to criminalize speech unless there is an incitement to imminent violence. 
Isn’t that part in bold what the OIC is arguing happened in Paris? Hillary continued:
…we are focused on promoting interfaith education and collaboration, enforcing antidiscrimination laws, protecting the rights of all people to worship as they choose, and to use some old-fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming, so that people don’t feel that they have the support to do what we abhor. 
Is not what Hillary was calling for at the very essence of political correctness? So, while everyone bemoans political correctness while pleading ignorance about its source, in the case of a movement to crackdown on Islamophobia, that source in the U.S. is Hillary Clinton (apparently it’s too politically incorrect to point that out). Hillary’s co-chair on that day, İhsanoğlu, said this:
“We continue to be particularly disturbed by attitudes of certain individuals or groups exploiting the freedom of expression to incite hatred by demonizing purposefully the religions and their followers. Though we respect their freedom of opinion and expression, we find these attitudes politically and ethically incorrect and insensitive.” 
It doesn’t get any more obvious than that. Hillary’s co-chair was openly admitting that he supported political correctness. Also in 2011, İhsanoğlu welcomed Barack Obama’s brother Malik Obama to the OIC headquarters in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.