Obligation to Prohibit Violence Based On Religion
A/C.3/68/L.48 Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping,stigmatization, discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against persons, based on religion or belief continues with reaffirmation of another accursed lie.
violence on the basis of religion or belief and to implement measures to guarantee
the equal and effective protection of the law,
Are Egypt, Pakistan and Indonesia obligated to prohibit and punish violence against Christians and their churches based on the victim’s status of not being Muslims? Who gives a damn about such an obligation? Who enforces it?
Instead, Muslims implement Allah’s Jihad imperative, expressed in Surah At-Taubah 9.123, secondary to 9.29, to wage war neighboring Jews and Christians.
9:29. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
9:123. O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allâh is with those who are the Al-Muttaqûn (the pious – see V.2:2).
Who do Muslims obey: the United Nations which can not enforce its edicts, or Allah who will damn them to eternal Hellfire for not waging war?
The Big Lie: Terrorism Cannot be Associated With Islam
Two draft resolutions currently under debate in the U.N. General
Assembly’s Third Committee share boiler plate reaffirming an accursed lie.
This post ignores the rest of the resolution text to concentrate on
refuting the big lie.
While pretending to combat intolerance &
violence based on religion and promote freedom of religion or belief,
these resolutions actually militate against freedom of religion,
promote violence and ignore the fact that tolerance becomes an evil
when applied to evil.
| Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping, stigmatization, discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against persons, based on religion or belief |
Freedom of religion or belief |
|---|---|
| A/C.3/67/L.47 | A/C.3/67/L.48 |
| Reaffirming that terrorism cannot and should not be associated with any religion, nationality, civilization or ethnic group, |
Reaffirming that terrorism cannot and should not be associated with any religion, nationality, civilization or ethnic group, |
Terrorism is an intrinsic sacrament of Islam.
Allah commands and exemplifies casting terror. Muhammad
deliberately built a reputation for barbarian rapine so as to
intimidate prospective victims so that they would surrender without
resistance.
The authors and sponsors of these resolutions seek
to criminalize criticism of Islam. They want to be able to
persecute and torture me for uttering and publishing the fatal facts
found in this blog post.
Note to doubters, dissenters & deniers: kindly
click the links provided and verify the quotes, then provide relevant,
verifiable facts to refute this post in your comments.
Who Associated Islam with Terrorism?
Allah
Surah Al-Imran
into the hearts of those who disbelieve,
because they joined others in worship with Allâh, for which He had sent
no authority; their abode will be the Fire and how evil is the abode of
the Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrongdoers).
The Prohibition of Obeying the Disbelievers; the Cause
of Defeat at Uhud…”Allah next conveys the good news that He will put fear of the
Muslims, and feelings of subordination to the Muslims in the
hearts of their disbelieving enemies, because of their Kufr and Shirk.
“…
Tafsir Ibn Abbas …fear of you such that
they run from you…
Surah Al-Anfal
angels, “Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror
into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so
strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes.”
Allah commands the Angels to fight and support the
Believers … I
will cast fear, disgrace and humiliation over those who defied My
command and denied My Messenger,…
Tafsir Ibn Abbas …(I will throw) cast
(fear into the hearts of those who disbelieve) the fear of Muhammad
(pbuh) and his Companions. ( …
punish them
severely in order to disperse those who are behind them, so that
they may learn a
lesson.
Striking Hard against Those Who disbelieve and
break the Covenants …This Ayah commands punishing them harshly
and inflicting casualties on them. This way, other enemies, Arabs and
non-Arabs, will be afraid and take a lesson from their end, …
Tafsir Ibn Abbas …deal with them so as to strike
fear in those who are behind them) such that they serve as a lesson
to those who are behind them, …
power, including steeds of war (tanks, planes, missiles, artillery,
etc.) to threaten
the enemy of
Allâh and your enemy, and others besides whom, you may not know but
whom Allâh does know. And whatever you shall spend in the Cause of
Allâh shall be repaid unto you, and you shall not be treated unjustly.
Making Preparations for War to strike Fear in the
Hearts of the Enemies of Allah …(to threaten), or to
strike fear,…
Tafsir al-Jalalayn …that thereby you may dismay, terrify…
Surah Al-Ahzab
who backed them (the disbelievers) Allâh brought them down from their
forts and cast
terror into their hearts, (so that) a group (of them) you
killed, and a group (of them) you made captives.
33:27. And He caused
you to inherit their lands, and their houses, and their riches,
and a land which you had not trodden (before). And Allâh is Able to do
all things.
Read The Campaign against Banu Qurayzah
in Tafsir Ibn Kathir to see the convergence of 8:57 & 59:2 and to
discover the identities of the group that was killed and the group that
was taken captive. Moe slaughtered the men and adolescent boys
who had surrendered after a long siege.
Surah Al-Hashr
He it is Who drove out the disbelievers among the people of the
Scripture (i.e. the Jews of the tribe of Banî An-Nadîr) from their
homes at the first gathering. You did not think that they would get
out. And they thought that their fortresses would defend them from
Allâh! But Allâh’s (Torment) reached them from a place whereof they
expected it not, and He cast terror into
their hearts, so that they destroyed their own dwellings with
their own hands and the hands of the believers. Then take admonition, O
you with eyes (to see).
59:13. Verily, you (believers in
the Oneness of Allâh – Islâmic Monotheism) are more awful as a fear
in their (Jews of Banî An-Nadîr) breasts than Allâh. That is
because they are a people who comprehend not (the Majesty and Power of
Allâh).
Muhammad
Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:
The Prophet said, “I have been given five things which were not given
to any one else before me.
1. Allah
made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a
distance of one month’s journey.
2. The earth has been made for me (and for my followers) a place for
praying and a thing to perform Tayammum, therefore anyone of my
followers can pray wherever the time of a prayer is due.
3. The booty
has been made Halal (lawful) for me yet it was not lawful for anyone
else before me.
4. I have been given the right of intercession (on the Day of
Resurrection).
5. Every Prophet used to be sent to
his nation only but I have been sent to all mankind.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been sent with the
shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I
have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the
enemy), and while I was sleeping, the
keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my
hand.” Abu Huraira added: Allah’s Apostle has left the world and
now you, people, are bringing out those treasures (i.e. the Prophet did
not benefit by them).
How did Allah cast terror?
Maulana Mufti Muhammad Shafi, commenting
on 59:2, in the Mariful Qur’an, says that Moe’s companions were the
agency of terror, by cutting and burning date trees.
- So, some
of the blessed Companions, in order to anger them or cast terror
into their hearts, cut and
burned down some of their date trees.
He
also cast terror by murder and genocide. Guillaume’s translation
of Hishham’s Rescension of Sirat Rasul Alah [The
Life of Muhammad] provides more details of a disturbing
nature. You really should go to Amazon and purchase a copy to
read. 8:57 & 60get
clarified on page 326.
you come upon them in war, deal with them so forcibly as to terrify
those
who follow them, haply they may take warning,’ i.e. make a severe
example of them to those that come after, that haply they may
understand.
‘And prepare what strength you can against them, and cavalry by which
you
may strike terror into the enemy of God and your enemy‘ as far
as His
words, ‘And whatever you spend in the way of God will be repaid to you:
you will not be wronged,’ i.e. you will not lose your reward with God in
the next life and a rapid recompense in this world.
Moe,
sensitive to the fact that he was a false prophet acting out of
mercenary motives, routinely had critics murdered Ka’b Ibn ai-Ashraf
was one of them; the story of his murder is in Sahih
Muslim 19.4436.
The Sira adds a clarifying detail which tells us more about by what
mechanism Allah cast terror. This brilliant little gem is found
on page 368.
attack upon God’s enemy cast terror among
the Jews, and there was no Jew in
Medina
who
did not fear for his life.
The
assassination of Ka’b Ibn ai-Ashraf terrorized the Jews of Medina so
they all feared impending murder. Asma bint Marwan was
enraged by Ka’b’s murder and recited critical poetry for which Moe had
her assassinated too. The following gem of revelation is found on
page 676.
day after Bint Marwan was killed the men of B.
Khatma became Muslims because they
saw the power of Islam.
A
tribe, terrified by her assassination, converted to Islam rather than
defend themselves. The raid on the Khaibar Oasis had a similar
effect, illustrative of 8:57 which confirms how Allah cast
terror. This gem of revelation is found on page 523.
the apostle had finished
with Khaybar, God struck terror to the
hearts
of the men of Fadak when they
heard what the apostle had done to
the
men of Khaybar. They
sent to him an offer of peace on condition that
they should keep half of their produce. Their messengers came to him in
Khaybar or on the road or after he came to Medina, and he accepted their
terms. Thus Fadak became his private property, because it had not been
attacked by horse or camel.
Further elaboration & confirmation is found in
the story of the conquest of B. Qurayza on page 461.
apostle passed by a number of his companions in al-Saurayn before
he got to B. Qurayza and asked if anyone had passed them. They replied
that Dihya b. Khalifa al-Kalbi had passed upon a white mule with a
saddle
covered with a piece of brocade. He said, ‘That was Gabriel
who has been
sent
to B. Qurayza to shake their castles and strike terror to their hearts.’
Yeah, right, they saw an angel riding a mule.
But there is more and more realistic on the same page.
apostle besieged
the B. Qurayza for twenty-five nights until they were sore
pressed
and God cast terror into their hearts.
Then Moe enslaved the women and children, slaughtering the men and
adolescent boys as a terrifying example for other intended victims. Its
in 33:26-27
and on page 468.
terror into their
hearts; some you slew and some you captured,’ i.e. he killed
the men and
captured
the women and children. ‘And caused you to inherit their land
and their dwellings, and their property, and a land you had not trod,’
i.e.
Khaybar. ‘For Allah can do all things.’
Hypocrisy:Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization …
Combating intolerance, negative
stereotyping and stigmatization of, and discrimination, incitement to
violence and violence against, persons based on religion or belief A/HRC/19/L.7 passed by consensus 03/23/12.
HYPOCRISY!
The OIC sponsored resolution contains a provision
180° out of phase with Shari’ah, as codified in Reliance of the
Traveller.
Reaffirming the obligation of States
to prohibit discrimination on the basis of
religion or belief and to implement measures to guarantee the equal and effective
protection of the law,
comply with Islamic rules that pertain to the safety
and indemnity oflife, reputation, and property. In
addition, they:
(1) are penalized for committing adultery or
theft, though not for drunkenness;
(2) are distinguished from Muslims in dress,
wearing a wide cloth belt (zunna:r);
(3) are not
greeted with “as-Salamu
‘alaykum” ;
(4) must keep to
the side of the street;
(5) may not build
higher than or as high as
the Muslims’
buildings, though if they acquire a
tall house, it is not razed;
(6) are forbidden
to openly display wine or
pork, (A: to ring
church bells or display crosses,)
recite the Torah or
Evangel aloud, or make public
display of their
funerals and feastdays;
(7) and are
forbidden to build new churches.
killing a male Muslim is
100 camels.
(N: Shafi’i scholars early converted the pastoral
equivalents to gold dinars (n: one dinar
equalling 4.235 grams of gold (dis: w15», the
amount due in the rulings below being the weight
of the gold, regardless of its current market
value.) (A: The stronger position in the Shafi’i
school is that indemnities should be reckoned in
camels, after which both parties may agree on a
lesser amount or another form of payment.)
]…]
04.9 (A: For the rulings below, one multiplies
the fraction named by the indemnity appropriate
to the death or injury’s type of intentionality and
other relevant circumstances that determine the
amount of a male Muslim’s indemnity (def:
04.2-6 and 04.13).)
The indemnity for
the death or injury of a
woman is one-half
the indemnity paid for a man.
The indemnity paid
for a Jew or Christian is
one-third of the
indemnity paid for a Muslim. The
indemnity paid for
a Zoroastrian is one-fifteenth
of that of a Muslim.
Reaffirming also that the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights
provides, inter alia, that everyone shall have the
right to
freedom of thought, conscience and religion or belief,
which shall
include freedom to have
or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice,
and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in
public or private, to
manifest his religion or belief in worship,
observance, practice and teaching,
and is sane voluntarily
apostatizes from Islam, he
deserves to be killed.
.
08.2 In such a case, it is obligatory for the
caliph (A: or his representative) to ask him to
repent and return to Islam. If he does, it is
accepted from him, but
if he refuses, he is
immediately killed.
011.5 […]
(6) are forbidden
to openly display wine or
pork, (A: to ring
church bells or display crosses,)
recite the Torah or
Evangel aloud, or make public
display of their
funerals and feastdays;
(7) and are
forbidden to build new churches.
Reaffirming further the positive role that the exercise of the right to
freedom of opinion and expression
and the full respect for the freedom to seek, receive
and impart
information can play in strengthening democracy and combating
religious
intolerance,
The organization who demanded persecution of the
publishers of the Danish Cartoons & Fitna and which seeks to
suppress the publication of Geert Wilders’ new book reaffirms the
positive role of free expression, yeah, right.
Deeply concerned about incidents of intolerance, discrimination and
violence
against persons based on their religion or belief in all regions
of the world,
The OIC is “deeply concerned”
about the slaughter, with impunity, of indigenous Christians in Egypt
& Nigeria and the bombing & burning of their homes, businesses
& churches. “Condemns in the strongest possible terms…”
Yeah, right, as if they would say “Allah’s curse be upon those
Muslims who murder Christians and destroy their property; may he bring
down the governments who allow impunity to the perpetrators. ”
They don’t and they won’t and we all know why they don’t.
Deploring any advocacy of discrimination or violence
on the basis of religion or belief,
O Prophet (Muhammad )! Urge the believers to fight. If there are twenty
steadfast persons amongst you, they will overcome two hundred, and if
there be a hundred steadfast persons they will overcome a thousand of
those who disbelieve, because they (the disbelievers) are people who do
not understand.
9:29. Fight against those who
(1) believe not in Allâh,
(2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden
by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the
religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the
Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with
willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
9:123. O you who believe! Fight those of the
disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness
in you, and know that Allâh is with those who are the Al-Muttaqûn (the
pious – see V.2:2).
o9.8 Thc caliph (025) makes
war upon Jews,
Christians, and
Zoroastrians (N: provided he has
first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice,
and if they will not, then invited them to
enter the social order of Islam by paying the nonMuslim
poll tax (jizya, def: 01 L4)-which is the
significance of their paying it, not the money
itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions)
(0: and the war
continues) until they
become Muslim or
else pay the non-Muslim poll
tax (0: in
accordance with the word of Allah Most
High,
“Fight those who do
not believe in Allah and
the Last Day and
who forbid not what Allah and
His messenger have
forbidden-who do not practice
the religion of
truth, being of those who have
been given the
Book-until they pay the poll tax
out of hand and are
humbled” (Koran 9:29),
the time and place for which is before the final descent
of Jesus (upon whom be peace). After his
final coming, nothing but Islam will be accepted
from them. for taking the poll tax is only effective
until Jesus’ descent (upon him and our Prophet be
peace), which is the divinely revealed law of
Muhammad, The coming of Jesus does not entail
a separate divinely revealed law, for he will rule
by the law of Muhammad, As for the Prophet’s
saying (Allah bless him and give him peace),
“I am the last, there will be no prophet
after me,”
this does not contradict the final coming of Jesus
(upon whom be peace), since he will not rule
according to the Evangel, but as a follower of our
Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace)).
There is and can be no G’d’d lie more egregious than
claiming to deplore advocacy of violence based on religion or
belief when your own G’d’d scripture, codified into Shari’ah, urges and
commands
you to wage perpetual war against Christians, Jews &
Zoroastrians.
Muslims who would sincerely abjure offensive jihad [Reliance,
Hedaya] condemn themselves to immediate execution
by the caliph and
eternal damnation by Allah as apostates from Islam. They can’t,
they don’t & they never will and it is blessed well time for the
world to acknowledge this fatal fact.
apostasy
from Islam (may Allah protect us from them) are:
[…]
(7) to deny any
verse of the Koran or anything
which by scholarly consensus (def: b7)
belongs to it, or to add a verse that does not belong
to it;
(14) to deny the
obligatory character of
something which by
the consensus of Muslims
(ijma’, def: b7) is
part of Islam, when it is well
known as such, like the prayer (salat) or even one
rak’a from one of the five obligatory prayers, if
there is no excuse (def: u2.4);
(19) to be
sarcastic about any ruling of the
Sacred Law;
Expresses deep concern at the continued serious instances
of derogatory stereotyping, negative profiling and stigmatization of
persons based on their religion or belief, as well as programmes and
agendas pursued by extremist organizations and groups aimed at creating
and perpetuating negative stereotypes about religious groups, in
particular when condoned by Governments;
- Motoons
- Fitna
- International Burn the Koran Day
- International Judge the Koran Day
- “Palestinians are an invented people”
- “Obviously,
Muslims would be someone you’d look at, absolutely,” … “The radical
Muslims are the people committing these
crimes, by and large, as well as younger males… Not exclusively but
these are things you profile to find the most likely candidate.”
Adopting measures to criminalize
incitement to
imminent violence based on religion or belief;
Incitement? 8:39,
57,
60, 65;
9:5,29,
110,
120,
123
& Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387 or pointing them out?
Ki-moon about Fitna:“There is no justification for hate speech or
incitement to violence,” Ban said in a statement. “The right of free expression is not
at stake here.”
derogatory stereotyping, negative profiling and stigmatization
Exactly how is that list different from
“defamation”?? Previous resolutions and one parallel resolution bitch bitterly about
associating Islam with terrorism. That is what it is all about,
especially “profiling”. The perpetrators of most recent mass
casualty terror attacks were Muslims shouting takbir when they
attacked. Allah said that he would & did cast terror. Allah
commanded Muslims to strike terror and prepare to strike terror. Moe
bragged about being made victorious by terror. Perish the thought
of any association between Islam & terrorism.
Terrorism is a battle tactic sanctified and ordained by Allah. Here is
the proof from the Qur’an, hadith and Tafsir Ibn kathir. Muslims do not
want us to know about this fatal fact and bitterly bitch about its
exposure. Examine this paragraph from a UN resolution which passed the
General Assembly without a vote December 19, 2012
equated with terrorism, as this
may have adverse consequences on the enjoyment of the right to freedom
of religion
or belief of all members of the religious communities concerned; [Draft resolution XVII]
- 3:151. We shall cast terror into the hearts of those
who disbelieve- …Allah next conveys the good news that He will put fear of the
Muslims, and feelings of subordination to the Muslims in the
hearts of
their disbelieving enemies, because of their Kufr and Shirk. … The Prohibition of Obeying the Disbelievers; the Cause
of Defeat at Uhud
- …Allah next conveys the good news that He will put fear of the
- 7:4. How many a township have We
destroyed! As a raid
by night, or while they slept at noon, Our terror came unto them.- Our torment
came upon them by
night or while they were taking their midday nap. ) means, Allah’s
command, torment and vengeance came over them at night or while taking
a nap in the middle of the day. Both of these times are periods of rest
and leisure or heedlessness and amusement. Nations that were destroyed
- Our torment
- 8:12. (Remember) when your Lord inspired the
angels, “Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those
who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all
their fingers and toes.”- …(I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have
disbelieved.)
means, `you — angels — support the believers, strengthen their
(battle) front against their enemies, thus, implementing My command to
you. I will cast fear,
disgrace and humiliation over those who defied My command and denied My
Messenger,
(so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers
and
toes.) strike them on their foreheads to tear them apart and over the
necks to cut them off, and cut off their limbs, hands and feet….Allah commands the Angels to fight and support the
Believers
- …(I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have
- 8:60. Against them make ready your strength to
the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into
(the hearts of) the enemies, of God and your enemies, and others
besides, whom ye may not know, but whom God doth know. Whatever ye
shall spend in the cause of God, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall
not be treated unjustly.- (to threaten), or to strike
fear, the enemy of Allah and your enemy), the disbelievers, Making Preparations for War to strike Fear in the
Hearts of the Enemies of Allah
- (to threaten), or to strike
- 33:26. And those of the people of the
Scripture who backed them (the disbelievers) Allah brought them down
from their forts and cast terror into their hearts, (so
that) a group (of them) you killed, and a group (of them) you made
captives.- (and cast terror into their
hearts😉 means fear, because they had
supported the idolators in their war against the Messenger of Allah and
the one who knows is not like the one who does not know. They had
terrified the Muslims and intended to kill them so as to gain earthly
power, but their plans backfired; the idolators ran away and the
believers were victorious while the disbelievers were losers; where
they had aimed for glory, they were humiliated. The Campaign against Banu Qurayzah
- (and cast terror into their
- 59:2.
He it is Who drove out the disbelievers among the people of the
Scripture (i.e. the Jews of the tribe of Bani An-Nadir) from their
homes at the first gathering. You did not think that they would get
out. And they thought that their fortresses would defend them from
Allah! But Allah’s (Torment) reached them from a place whereof they
expected it not, and He cast terror into
their hearts, so that they destroyed their own dwellings with
their own
hands and the hands of the believers. Then take admonition, O you with
eyes (to see).- …Therefore, Allah
sent His torment down on them;
it can never be averted, and His appointed destiny touched them; it can
never be resisted. The Prophet forced them to evacuate and abandon
their fortified forts that Muslims did not think they would ever
control. …Then take admonition, O you with eyes.) meaning,
“Contemplate the end of those who defied Allah’s command, contradicted
His Messenger and denied His Book. See how Allah’s humiliating
torment
struck them in this life, as well as, the painful torment that Allah
has reserved for them in the Hereafter.”… The End that Bani An-Nadir suffered
- …Therefore, Allah
- 59:13. Of a truth ye are stronger (than they)
because of the terror in their hearts, (sent) by
God. This is because they are men devoid of understanding.- …(Verily, you
are more fearful in their breasts than Allah.)
meaning, the hypocrites fear you more than they fear Allah, as He
says; (Behold! a section of them fear men as they fear Allah or
even
more.)… The False Promise of Support the Hypocrites gave to the Jews
- …(Verily, you
- 8:57. So if you gain the mastery over them in
war, punish them severely in
order to disperse those who are behind them, so that they may
learn a lesson.- …(then disperse those who are behind them,) by severely
punishing
﴿the captured people﴾ according to Ibn `Abbas, Al-Hasan Al-Basri,
Ad-Dahhak, As-Suddi, `Ata’ Al-Khurasani and Ibn `Uyaynah. This
Ayah commands
punishing them harshly and inflicting casualties on them.
This way, other enemies, Arabs and non-Arabs, will be afraid and take a
lesson from their end,… Striking Hard against Those Who disbelieve and break
the Covenants
- …(then disperse those who are behind them,) by severely
- Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 7, Number 331:
Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:
The Prophet said, “I have been given five things which were not given
to any one else before me.1. Allah made me
victorious by awe, (by His frightening my
enemies) for a distance of one month’s journey. . - Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been sent with the
shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror(cast in the
hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the
treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand.”
Abu Huraira added: Allah’s Apostle has left the world and now you,
people, are bringing out those treasures (i.e. the Prophet did not
benefit by them).
Brig. S.K. Malik wrote The Qur’anic Concept of War
as a training manual for the army of Pakistan. His analysis will
help
you to comprehend their strategy. Terror is both a means and an
end.
This paragraph comes from the bottom of page 59. [Emphasis added.]
enemies is not only
a means, it is the end in itself. Once a condition of terror into
the opponent’s heart is
obtained, hardly anything is left to be
achieved. It is the
point where the means and the end meet
and merge. Terror is not a means of imposing decision upon
the enemy; it is me decision we wish to impose upon him.
There is a purpose for the numerous continuing
assaults against Christian faith in this nation. You will not
fully comprehend it without reading this next quote.
There is one necessary prerequisite for instilling terror: the
destruction of our faith. Islam’s strong faith shields Muslims from
being terrorized. This paragraph comes from page 60. [Emphasis added.]
struck into the hearts of an army by merely
cutting its lines of communication or depriving it of its routes
of withdrawal. It is basically related to the strength or weakness
of the human soul. It can
be instilled only if the opponent’s
Faith is destroyed.
Psychological dislocation is temporary;
spiritual dislocation is permanent.
Psychological dislocation can be
produced by a physical act but this does not hold good of the
spiritual dislocation. To
instill terror into the hearts of the enemy,
it
is essential. in the ultimate analysis, to dislocate his Faith. An
invincible Faith is immune to terror. A weak Faith offers inroads
to terror. The Faith
conferred upon us by the Holy Qur’an has
the inherent strength to ward off terror from
us and to enable
us
to strike terror into the enemy. Whatever the form or type of
strategy directed against the enemy, it must, in order to be effective,
be capable of striking terror into the hearts of the enemy. A strategy
that fails to attain this condition suffers from inherent drawbacks
and weaknesses; and should be reviewed and modified. This rule
is fully applicable to nuclear as well as conventional wars. It is
equally true of the strategy of nuclear deterrence in fashion
today. To be credible and effective, the strategy of deterrence
must be capable of striking terror into the hearts of the enemy.
For those seeking further details:
http://infidelsunited.com/documents/2944/172/shari-ah-blasphemy-law-gets-un-endorsement-again
Big Lie: “UN drops call to outlaw ‘defamation of religions’
There is a sucker born every minute, because if we did not suck, we would not survive. Unfortunately, there is a surplus of adult bottom feeders who will cheerfully take and run with any bait. A Google search for UN + “Defamation of Religions” turned up several news articles in addition to those in yesterday’s alert.
-
The US Is Not Opening The Door To Limiting Freedom of Speech
Human Rights First – 5 hours agoHuman Rights First has worked for years to reverse the tide of defamation of religions at the UN , and has welcomed HRC resolution 16/18 as well as this most recent General Assembly resolution. We believe it is important for governments to now… -
Turkey and America
The Cutting Edge – Dec 18, 2011[will] help in enacting domestic laws for the countries involved in the issue, as well as formulating international laws preventing inciting hatred resulting from the continued defamation of religions.” It unfairly held up the American experience for … -
Free speech is in the cross hairs
Prospectus – Dec 18, 2011Although the latest resolution refers to “incitement” rather than “defamation” of religion (which appeared in the 2005 resolution), it continues the disingenuous effort to justify crackdowns on religious critics in the name of human rights law. … -
Speak Not of Evil
Canada Free Press – Dec 19, 2011The Obama administration started down this ill-advised road by cosponsoring in 2009 an OIC-drafted resolution in the UNHuman Rights Council that condemned “defamation of religion” – read, Islam. That initiative helped advance the Islamists’ …
| UN drops call to outlaw ‘defamation of religions‘ msnbc.com AP The call on countries to prohibit “defamation” had been included in a … decisive break from the polarizing focus in the past on defamation of religions.” |
| UN General Assembly Abandons Dangerous “Defamation of Religion … Human Rights First “Today’s unanimous vote marks a decisive break from the polarizing focus in the past on defamation of religions.” said Human Rights First’s Tad Stahnke. … |
| UN condemns religious intolerance, drops ‘defamation‘ Reuters Africa … religious intolerance without urging states to outlaw “defamation of religions,” an appeal critics said opened the door to abusive “blasphemy” laws. … |
| UN condemns religious intolerance, drops ‘defamation‘ Reuters India L had won majority approval in UN rights bodies in Geneva and at the UN General Assembly for annual resolutions on “combating defamation of religions. … |
|
||
| UN condemns religious intolerance, drops ‘defamation’ line for first … By Louis Charbonneau For the first time in more than a decade, the U.N. General Assembly on Monday condemned religious intolerance without urging states to outlaw defamation of religions, an appeal critics said opened the door to abusive blasphemy laws. FaithWorld |
|
||
| UN drops call to outlaw ‘defamation of religions‘ – Beverly Hills … Teen BHEF met Tuesday to approve their revised by-laws and present awards of appreciation to Sandy West of The Beverly Hilton and Corrine Verdery of Oasis … www.bhcourier.com/article/World/World/UN…/83854 |
||
| UN drops call to outlaw ‘defamation of religions‘ – TODAY News … The U.N. General Assembly on Monday condemned religious intolerance without urging states to outlaw “defamation of religions.” today.msnbc.msn.com/id/45726263/ |
||
| UN drops call to outlaw ‘defamation of religions‘ – Newsvine ‘Governments should now focus on concrete measures to fight religiously motivated violence … while recognizing the importance of freedom of expression,’ … world-news.polls.newsvine.com/_…/9561504-un-drops-call-to… |
Only two out of twelve articles reflect objective factual reality, the rest swallow the bait. That is not a good sign. Lets sneak around the gate of the defamation meme and examine the core issue. Words have meanings, but Muslims assign their own meanings to common words.We must not assume that those words mean what they say when spoken by Muslims.
The opening of the 15th session of the Human Rights Council was marked by an address from Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, Secretary General of the OIC.
deliberately meant to defame religions as well incite hatred, xenophobia, discrimination and
violence against religions, in particular Islam. The increasing incidents of violence and
discrimination on the basis of religion must not be ignored. We hope that this and other
related issues remain an important priority in the work of the Council.
The most recent and unfortunate in the series of such events was the announcement
pertaining to Bum a Koran Day. It was highly provocative towards the religious sentiments
of Muslims everywhere in the world and must be condemned in the strongest possible terms.
On August 24,2010 I issued a cautionary statement on the plan to burn the Holy Qur’an and
urged the American people as a whole as well as the world community to reject the call of the
Gainesville Church pastor[….]
In this regard all xenophobic campaigns of fear mongering and discriminatory
measures – both in policy and practice – which restrict, prohibit or discriminate against of any
religion such as ban on the constriction of minarets, organization of events that incite hatred
like Burn a Koran Day, and other discriminatory measures must be strongly condemned by
the international community. A recurrence of such events substantiate OIC’s call for a
normative approach to deal with this menace that continues to pose a clear ‘and present danger
to peace, security ‘and stability in the regional as well as the global context. Such acts fuel
discrimination, extremism and mis-perception leading to polarization and fragmentation with
dangerous unintendecl ancl unforeseen consequences.[…]
[…]such events which endanger peaceful coexistence
between nations and create an environment conducive to violence
The first three sentences quoted above are loaded with meaning which must be dissected and examined.
regrettable events
In this case, one event: International Burn The Qur’an Day, which was scheduled for 09/11/10 to commemorate the accursed abomination by highlighting the Qur’an verses which inspired it. The event was called off under intense government pressure.
deliberately meant to
How does anyone know the intention of the event unless it is clearly stated? The stated purpose of the event was to foster awareness of Islamic doctrines and their real world consequences. But Ihsanoglu assigns other intentions which he projects onto the event from afar.
defame religions
Defamation is false and malicious. What is false about connecting the dots; Allah’s sanctification of terror, his casting terror resulting in death, captivity & dispossession, Moe’s bragging about terror making him victorious and the abominable act motivated by Allah’s imperative, threat and promise?
incite
Pastor Jones was not inciting anyone to do anything more than incinerate the book which inspired the “Magnificent 19”. Nothing was to be said, implied or illustrate to incite anyone to assault Muslims. He issued no war cry or call to arms and implied none.
hatred
It is only natural for a nation under attack and threat of attack to hate its attackers and the damnable doctrines which motivate them and inspire them to attempt genocide & politicide. No incitement is needed to make intelligent and informed Americans hate Islam.
discrimination
People naturally make choices. If we choose to avoid association with and proximity to persons made inimical to us by their ideology, that is discrimination, but it is not evil.
Hating a man for his skin pigment is evil. Hating a man because he adheres to an ideology which enjoins him to kill or enslave you is not evil, it is common sense. Warning people about that ideology and its consequences is not inciting hatred. Hatred is incited by the ideology and the acts it inspires.
violence
When Pastor Jones tried and burned a Qur’an in March of 2011, rioting broke out in Pakistan. The riots were not incited by anything in Gainesville, they were incited by what was preached in the mosques at Jumah Salat. The politicians and media dare not make the connection between the riots and the end of Friday afternoon sermons. Instead, they prefer to blame an unrelated event separated by thousands of miles and several days.
events that incite hatred
Beirut Embassy bombing
USS Cole bombing
WTC1
WTC2
Beslan Massacre
Mumbai Massacre
London subway bombing
Madrid rail bombing
endanger peaceful coexistence
Trying and burning a Qur’an did not start a war; what did? have you forgotten? When such a threat is issued, why do we lift Satan’s tail and pucker up?
Defamation, while prominently cited, is not the issue. Examine this transcript of remarks by Pakistan’s Ambassador at the 16th session of the HRC.
the OIC)
Mr. Zamir Akram
03/24/11
Thank you Mr. President. On behalf of the OIC countries, I have the
honor to introduce the draft resolution entitled “combating
intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization of and
discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against persons
based on religion or belief contained in document L.38.
Mr. President: this resolution addresses a number of
issues over which the OIC has been expressing concern over the years.
having said that, I wish to state categorically that this
resolution does not replace earlier resolutions on combating
defamation. which were adopted by the Human Rights Council and
remain valid. This resolution L.38 is an attempt on the
part of the oic to build consensus on an issue of vital importance
not only to Muslims but to people of all religions and beliefs by
identifying ways and means to deal with the growing problems of
religious incitement and discrimination and incitement to hatred and violence based on
religion or belief.
At the heart of this resolution are a series of practical steps
which need to be taken by states in order to address
this problem. This resolution addresses the core issues in a manner
that is acceptable to all including in a legal sense, thus
seeking to bring all stake holders on board. The OIC has gone
the extra mile to maintain a spirit of constructive engagement with all
partners during this process of consultation.
Our primary objective is to ensure that this text,
which will hopefully be adopted by consensus, will bind us all to the
commitments contained therein and oblige us all to ensure compliance
with its decisions.
Mr. President: Muslims around the world continue to be confronted
with ever increasing instances of intolerance, negative stereotyping,
stigmatization, discrimination and violence on the basis of their religion; Islam.
Objective academic studies reveal that following the end of the cold war, the
pernicious doctrine of a clash of civilizations signaled the start of a narrative that required
the construction of a new enemy to replace the global threat of
Communism with the so-called menace of Islam.
The reprehensible acts of terrorism on September 11,
2001 provided the trigger to unleash the clash of civilizations to the
forefront of global politics. In the general Western view, no
distinction was made between a handful of extremists and terrorists and
the overwhelming majority of peaceful and law abiding Muslims
living around the world. To make matters worse, against the backdrop of
the recent global economic crisis, these fears of Islam and Muslims are
now being manipulated by irresponsible and bigoted Western politicians
to gain political mileage in their countries, unfortunately, with
remarkable success.
Terms such as Islamofascists have become common.
Even the Qur’an has not been spared; it has been compared to Hitler’s
Mein Kampf. More recently, it was tried for religious crimes and
burnt. Minarets at mosques deliberately depicted on posters
as missiles, have been banned. There have even been restrictions on
shops selling halal food, while no such restrictions exist on kosher
food outlets which are similar.
There is also increasing discrimination against Muslims in various
parts of the world. They are being subjected to racial profiling
which confronts them with intractable problems at every border where
they are checked and re-checked. Their businesses are repeatedly
scrutinized and their places of worship disallowed or desecrated.
They are made to feel unwelcome in societies where they live as
minorities.
One prominent politician has recently organized
hearings that seek to put on trial the entire Muslim community and are
obviously designed to stoke fears against Muslims in that
country.
Mr. President, the efforts by the oic to defend
our religion, our holy book and our prophet and our people have
often been misrepresented as being contrary to international human
rights principles and laws, and in particular, rejected as undermining
the freedom of expression or opinion. The reality is different.
It is therefore appropriate in such a position, for us to try and
explain our faith and our principles. I hope, Mr. President, you will
give me a bit of extra time to do so.
Mr. President: the Qur’an lays great emphasis on the
need for religious tolerance as well as freedom of thought and
opinion. In chapter 2, verse 256, the Qur’an states there is no
compulsion in religion. In chapter 18, verse 29, the Qur’an
maintains that truth is from your Lord, so let him who please believe
and him who please disbelieve. As regards freedom of
thought and opinion in Islam, the Qur’an states, in chapter 16, in verse 125 invite
all to the way of your creator with wisdom and arguments that are the
best and most gracious. The Qur’an and the traditions of the holy
prophet also lay emphasis on the treatment of non-Muslims.
According to Prophet Muhammad, (PBUH), he who hurts a non-Muslim
citizen of a Muslim state I am his adversary and I shall be his
adversary on the day of judgment.
Mr. President: it is also instructive for us to know
that we Muslims are not only bound by temporal laws to respect human
rights but by divine enjunctions contained in the Qur’an. The
basic human rights as ordained in the Qur’an include the
rights to life, individual freedom, justice, equality, privacy, association
and basic necessities of life or minimum standard of living. These
obligations also include respect for women, equality among human
beings, freedom of expression, protection from arbitrary imprisonment
and the right to oppose tyranny and injustice. the last sermon of
the prophet (PBUH) is, in itself, a comprehensive charter of human
rights. Islam has even established a complete code for the right
of combatants in war. Measures for the protection of all combatants as
well as homes and property belonging to them.
Mr. President: I have dwelt at length on these characteristics of Islam
because I want to underscore the common principles that underlie our
faith and the requirements of international law including international
human rights and humanitarian law. Indeed, given the tremendous
contributions by Islam in various fields of human activity over
the years, these principles have contributed to the evolution of
the very principles that we are trying to uphold today.
Mr. President, we sincerely believe that that irrespective of our
different cultural backgrounds and traditions, there is a shared
interest for all of us to show respect for each other’s religions and
beliefs as well as to prevent any advocacy of religious hatred and
intolerance, discrimination and incitement on the basis of religion or
belief.
The resolution under consideration seeks to achieve
these laudable objectives through a range of actions by states
including administrative steps, measures to criminalize imminent
violence, training and awareness programs, promotion of dialogue and
understanding at all levels. The resolution also calls for
a global dialogue for the promotion of a culture of tolerance and peace
and in this context it decides to convene a panel discussion in the
Human Rights Council. We hope that this resolution will be
adopted by consensus. Before concluding, Mr. President, I would
like to place on record my appreciation for the support and cooperation
of all my colleagues in the oic and in particular, members of
the core group of ambassadors that we set up to work out this
resolution. I have truly benefited from the wisdom and advice and
without their support this text would not have been possible. I
would also like to thank the Secretary General of the oic whose
support and guidance made this resolution possible. In addition I
would like to express my appreciation — my sincere appreciation to all
our partners in the various groups, especially the ambassadors of the
U.S. and the U.K. on behalf of the European Union for their cooperative
and constructive approach. Let me also thank the ambassadors from
the African group, grulac and Croatia for their cooperation and
engagement in this effort. I am glad that this oic initiative has
met with broad cross regional support which will send out a strong
message of unity from this council. Finally I would like to thank
the experts from Pakistan, the U.S., the U.K. and other countries for
their tireless efforts to work out the text of this resolution. I thank
you Mr. president.
Akram’s screed contains numerous lies, which have been dissected in another blog post.
number of issues
To see what Akram was talking about, read the Islamophobia Report for April ’11. The three principal exemplars are the Motoons, Fitna and the above mentioned Qur’an burning.
Motoons
The ostensible objection to depicting Moe is idolatry. There are two problems with that. First, Moe ain’t supposed to be the deity, Allah is. Second, nobody would possibly make those cartoons an object of idolatry. The real reason for objecting to their publication is their depicting Moe as a terrorist.
Moe could not have possessed a bomb because he died prior to the invention of gunpowder. Moe cast terror by a series of barbarian attacks, deliberately building a reputation for barbarian repine, so that he was more feared than Allah. Moe bragged about being made victorious by awe & terror. What more do you need to know to make a judgment?
Fitna
The 15 minute documentary juxtaposes Qur’an verses and ahadith with the rabid rants of Imams at Jumah Salat and resulting acts of terror and rioting. Fitna does not incite violence, it exposes incitement. Fitna: Supporting Documentation 03/27/08 documents the ayat quoted in the documentary. Though words have meanings, we must be aware of the meanings intended by Muslims. HRC 16/18 & Draft resolution XVII appear to concentrate on incitement.
discrimination, hostility or violence, whether it involves the use of print, audiovisual
or electronic media or any other means;
that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence;
(0 Adopting measures to criminalize the incitement to imminent violence
based on religion or belief;
incitement
What is it? Am I inciting hatred and violence by exposing the damnable doctrines of Islam which inculcate hatred and incite violence? There is only one way to know the meaning: we must examine recent exemplary statements. This one, by Secretary Ban Ki-moon is dispositive.
According to the Secretary General, Fitna constitutes hate speech & incitement not protected by freedom of expression. From that statement, it is clear tha the intention of HRC 16/18 and Draft resolution XVII is to criminalize all criticism of Islam.
negative stereotyping
What is the difference between stereotyping and defamation? Because Moe was a terrorist, who commanded Muslims to emulate himself, and because Allah commanded terrorism, Muslims are commanded to obey Allah and because selectivity is prohibited, all Muslims are potential terrorists. To the extent that they are believers in Allah, his promise and his threat, they will eventually participate in an attack. If it were not true, this paragraph would be defamatory. Even though it is true, it is negative and it is stereotyping, condemned by the resolutions. In any case,
defamation
Islam is terrorism! Allah sanctified it & engaged in it. Moe bragged about being made victorious by it. To those bigots who who deny the obvious facts previously documented by reference to the Qur’an & hadth, this is defamatory. Previous resolutions condemned associating Islam with terrorism. These resolutions omit that meme, so, has the UN abandoned the defamation meme? HELL NO!!! And I will prove it. Draft resolution XVII ain’t the only resolution passed by acclamation Dec. 19. I know something you don’t know but are about to find out.
may have adverse consequences on the enjoyment of the right to freedom of religion
or belief of all members of the religious communities concerned;
¶10, on page 3 of Draft resolution XVIII, emphasizes that Islam must not be equated with terrorism, which it is by the testimony of its own deity & founder previously cited. Equation with terrorism fits the defamation meme, and it has not been dropped or abandoned by the UN, it lives on in a concurrent resolution. The suckers have swallowed the bait, hook, line and sinker.
¶12(j), on page 4, belies the assertion that freedom of expression is not threatened.
international standards of human rights, to combat hatred, discrimination,
intolerance and acts of violence, intimidation and coercion motivated by intolerance
based on religion or belief, as well as incitement to hostility and violence, with
particular regard to members of religious minorities in all parts of the world;
For the Morons among my readers, “all necessary and appropriate action” means legislation to combat “incitement to hostility and violence”, which means: Fitna, the Motoons and this blog post.
No doubt the Moronic chorus will begin chanting: “that ain’t in the resolution under discussion”. To which I gleefully reply: Ye Suckers!!! Assumptions make asses of you!
based on religion or belief;
¶5(f) on page 5 of Draft resolution XVII, proves you wrong. “Adopting measures to criminalize” is a code phrase for legislation. They are demanding passage & enforcement to establish criminal punishment for publications such as Fitna, the Motoons and this blog post. Remember, Ban Ki-Moon defined the terms for us.
“U.N. Tackles Religious Intolerance without Limiting Free Speech“
Legislation to criminalize the publication of Fitna, the Motoons and this blog post will not limit free speech. Yeah, right ;=(
OIC: United Stand Against Intolerance ?
OIC: United Stand Against Intolerance ?
Last March, the HRC passed a new resolution which was said to abandon
the nefarious “defamation of religions” concept, substituting “negative
stereotyping” & “incitement”. That is the official position;
divergent from objective factual reality. The distinction is without
difference, and the amended verbiage is persiflage.
That fact is exposed by a March 24 address to the
HRC by Mr.
Zamir Akram, Pakistan’s Ambassador. He made it clear that
the new resolution does not abrogate previous resolutions, instead, it
confirms them. His speech is dissected in detail here.
President: this resolution addresses a number of issuesover which the OIC has been
expressing concern over the years. having said that, I wish to
state categorically that this resolution does not replace earlier
resolutions on combating defamation.which were adopted by the Human
Rights Council and remain valid. This resolution L.38
is an attempt on the part of the oic to build consensuson an issue of vital importance
not only to Muslims but to people of all religions and beliefs by
identifying ways and means to deal with the growing problems of
religious incitementand
discrimination and incitement to hatredand violencebased on religion or belief.
The Secretary General of the OIC also addressed the HRC on the subject of the new resolution.
defamation of any religion, dehumanization of the followers or
denigration of symbols sacred to
all religions. The
developments including the ban of construction of minarets, the
attempts towards burning of Qur’an and the use of Islamophobia
as an instrument of electoral politics are ominous. There is an
urgent need to initiate and sustain what I would like to term as
‘preventive cultural diplomacy’.
We need to move beyond event based calls
for action to create spaces for structured engagement The
Human Rights framework provides with a concrete basis for
this engagement. We believe that tbe workshops on
incitement to hatred under the Durban mandate constitute and important
avenue for a synthesis aimed at bridging the divergence of views.
The Secretary General has spoken out again, this
time uttering & publishing a lie so egregious that it must be
refuted immediately. It is necessary to rub his snout in his mess
of deception.
to limit freedom of expression, give Islam preferential
treatment, curtail creativity or allow discrimination against religious
minorities in Muslim countries. “
- never sought to
limit freedom of expression - OIC
Secretary-General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu expressed his dismay and
disappointment at the release of the book despite
the fact that he, and some leaders of Muslim countries, had personally
written letters to the foreign minister of Denmark, urging the Danish
government to stop the publication of the book because of its
highly provocative and inciting content.[Khaleej Times Habib Shaikh] - Tajikistan,
current
chair of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) has
sent an official
request to the UN to pressure Norway to stop publication of a
reprint of the book with scandalous cartoons featuring the prophet
Mohammed. […] The
letter, addressed to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, voices
the concern of 57 members of the OIC and calls
on the UN to “take measures against” the plan, reports Interfax. [http://rt.com/news/islamic-un-stop-cartoons/] - “Pakistan
said it told the Dutch ambassador that it was incumbent on the
Netherlands to prosecute
Mr Wilders for defamation and deliberately
hurting Muslim sentiments, the official Associated Press of
Pakistan
news agency reported.”[BBC
News]
For the benefit of those suffering from anal cranial
juxtaposition, I will clear away the chaff:
- never sought to limit
freedom of expression - urging
the Danish
government to stop the publication - pressure
Norway to stop publication - told
the Dutch ambassador - to
prosecute
Mr Wilders
From the viewpoint of a rational and honest person,
Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu is a damned liar, having deliberately made an
egregiously untrue statement. From the Islamic point of view, he
is not a liar because Islam does not recognize disbelievers as human,
denying our rights. They can not violate our freedom of expression
because we have none. Human rights do not apply to us in their point of
view. The sanctity of life is conditioned on being Muslim.
pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and
property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with
them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah[…] [Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387]
Having exposed the most egregious deception, I will
continue fisking this screed, which is being widely propagated. I
perceive that this and related articles are the first wave of a tsunami
of pressure focused on the next General Assembly session beginning
September 20.
As is my habit with target rich environments, I will
link my comments to superscripts in the text. Click the superscripts to
read the comments and use your Backspace key to return to the
text.
|
|
|
Istanbul, Turkey – The horrific
and tragic incident that happened in Norway reminds us again of the importance of combating religious intolerance1 and promoting cultural understanding2. Anti-Islam and anti-Muslim attitudes and activities3, known as Islamophobia, are increasingly finding place in the agenda of ultra-right wing4 political parties and civil societies in the West in their anti-immigrant5 and anti-multiculturalism6 policies, as was evident in the manifesto of the Norway killer7. Their views8 are being promoted under the banner of freedom of expression9 while claiming that Muslims do not respect that right. A few days before the Norway attack, on 15 July in Istanbul, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and the United States agreed to a united stand on “[c]ombating intolerance10, negative stereotyping11 and stigmatization of12, and discrimination13, incitement to violence14, and violence against persons based on religion or belief15” through the implementation of UN Human Rights Council Resolution 16/18. The meeting – co-chaired by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and myself, with the attendance of the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs together with the foreign ministers and officials of OIC member states and Western countries, as well as international organisations – reaffirmed the commitment of the participants to the effective implementation of the measures set in the resolution.16 This was a major step towards strengthening the foundations of tolerance and respect for religious diversity17 as well as enhancing the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms around the world18. The OIC, which was the initiator of Resolution 16/18, worked in close cooperation in the drafting process with the United States and the European Union in bringing about a breakthrough on 21 March. The 2011 HRC resolution is a genuine effort to usher in an era of understanding on the issue of religious intolerance. It gives the widest margin of freedom of expression, and reiterates the rejection of discrimination, incitement and stereotyping used by the other or against the symbols of the followers of religions. 19 The OIC has never sought to limit freedom of expression, give Islam preferential treatment, curtail creativity or allow discrimination against religious minorities in Muslim countries. The Islamic faith is based on tolerance and acceptance of other religions. It does not condone discrimination of human beings on the basis of caste, creed, colour or faith20. It falls on all the OIC member states as a sacred duty to protect the lives and property of their non-Muslim citizens and to treat them without discrimination of any form. Those elements who seek to harm or threaten minority citizens must be subjected to law. Our strong stand condemning violence perpetrated against non-Muslims whether in Iraq, Egypt or Pakistan has been consistent. No one has the right to insult another for their beliefs or to incite hatred and prejudice. That kind of behaviour is irresponsible and uncivilised. We also cannot overlook the fact that the world is diverse. The Western perception on certain issues would differ from those held by others. We need to be sensitive and appreciative of this reality, more so when it comes to criticising or expressing views on issues related to religion and culture. 21 The publication of offensive cartoons of the Prophet six years ago that sparked outrage across the Muslim world, the publicity around the film Fitna and the more recent Qur’an burnings represent incidents of incitement to hatred22 that fuel an atmosphere of dangerous mutual suspicion. Freedom of expression has to be exercised with responsibility23. At the same time, violent reactions to provocations are also irresponsible and uncivilised and we condemn them unequivocally. It is not enough to pass resolutions and laws against religious incitement. We should also be diligent in launching more initiatives and measures towards better intercultural dialogue and understanding at all levels – the political, social, business, media, academic and religious. Resolution 16/18 includes an eight-point approach that calls for various measures to foster tolerance, including developing collaborative networks to build mutual understanding and constructive action, creating appropriate mechanisms within the government to identify and address potential areas of tension between members of religious communities, and raising awareness at the local, national and international levels on the effects of negative religious stereotyping and incitement to religious hatred. The implementation of the 2011 HRC Resolution 16/1824 would take us a long way in making our world a more peaceful and harmonious place to live in. ### * Professor Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu is the Secretary General of the Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 16 August 2011, www.commongroundnews.org Copyright permission is granted for publication. |
- Search: “Ekmeleddin
Ihsanoglu”+ “stop publication” - Results: 35
- Khaleej Times Habib Shaikh [Emphasis added.]
2 October 2010 JEDDAH — The Organisation
of the Islamic Conference has condemned the publication of the
book Tyranny of Silence in Denmark.The book, containing blasphemous caricatures, hit the stores in Denmark
on Thursday amid concerns over a backlash from the Muslim world.The cartoons were first published by the Jyllands-Posten newspaper in
2005, resulting in condemnation from Muslims around the world.OIC
Emphasising
Secretary-General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu expressed his dismay and
disappointment at the release of the book despite
the fact that he, and some leaders of Muslim countries, had personally
written letters to the foreign minister of Denmark, urging the Danish
government to stop the publication of the book because of its
highly provocative and inciting content. […]
the moral responsibility of the political leadership of Denmark,
Ihsanoglu said the publication
of the book was a deliberate attempt to incite prejudice and animosity.
This would undermine the ongoing efforts of the international community
to promote understanding and peaceful coexistence among people of
diverse religious and cultural backgrounds. - http://rt.com/news/islamic-un-stop-cartoons/Tajikistan,
current
chair of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) has
sent an official
request to the UN to pressure Norway to stop publication of a
reprint of the book with scandalous cartoons featuring the prophet
Mohammed. […] The
letter, addressed to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, voices
the concern of 57 members of the OIC and calls
on the UN to “take measures against” the plan, reports Interfax.
* whoever seeks a religion other than Islâm, it will never be accepted
[3:85}
* fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism:
i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will
all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world ]. [8:39]
* those who disbelieve, and die while they are disbelievers, it is they
on whom is the Curse of Allâh and of the angels and of mankind[2:161]
- Cultural
understanding, yeah, right. They do not want us to understand Islam,
they want us to accept a false image; a web of lies spun by Islam and
its apologists. What passes for cultural understanding is really
kitman: deception by obfuscation. - Translation: resistance: Kuffar
attempting to defend themselves and their culture. Phobia implies
irrational fear and loathing. There is nothing irrational about
loathing an institution which has a 1400 year track record of genocide,
murdering an estimated 270*106 people. - The VVP is not Nazi or fascist, it is
democratic. The Secretary General is using loaded words as a smear
tactic. - The Immigrants in question are
primarily
Muslims, living as parasites on the state and breeding like rats. They
tend to rape, riot and block the streets raising their butts to the
moon. Whats not to oppose about that? - Multiculturalism is the idea that
an inferior culture which dominates women, assaults Queers, rapes
indigenous girls, declares superiority, refuses to assimilate,
threatens war, supports terrorism and constantly escalates its demands
is equal to Western Civilization. Whats not to oppose about suicidal
idiocy? - Breivert’s Manifesto discusses ‘martyrdom
operations’. “Yes, for certain religious members,certain measures are obviously in violation to biblical teachings but the amount of grace
and divine
goodwill generated at the point where you sacrifice everything (in the
martyrdom
operation) will provide you with an abundance of it, which will more
than
nullify any
minor or serious sins committed prior to operation.” [pg. 846]
On page 849 he lists three pieces of music to be played during
‘martyrdom operations’. It is obvious that Breivert adopted enemy
doctrine & tactics. It is obvious that he is not sane. While
objective facts reproduced in the manifesto remain true and accepted by
others, the manifesto is his alone. The manifesto is violent, see pages
1028 & 1344; rational resistance is educational and political, not
violent. Ihsanoglu is engaging in smear tactics, attempting to tar
others with Breivert’s violence. - Our views of Islam are founded on facts
discovered in Islam’s canon of scripture, tradition, exegesis &
jurisprudence. Check out ICCPR,
Article 19. §1 guarantees the right to hold opinions. §2 guarantees
freedom of expression. The spewers of feces assert that rights
are interdependent and cling bitterly to exaggerated ideas of Article
20. - In America we have the Declaration of
Independence; God gave us
the right to live; & Bill of
rights. “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech.”
If prohibited from truthfully communicating warning of approaching
danger, we would be rendered defenseless. We perceive Islam to be a
threat because of its declaration & prosecution of perpetual war.
- 2:216
- 8:39
- 9:29
- 9:111
- 9:123
- 47:4
- 61:4
- 61:10-11
- Sahih Bukhari
Volume 4, Book 53, Number 386 - Tafsir Ibn Kathir
The
Good News that Muslims will conquer the Known World, and ultimately the
Entire World - Reliance of the Traveller, O9.8
- Risala
- Hedaya
- If they were sincere about combating
intolerance, they would outlaw the Qur’an because it inculcates
intolerance. Is there anything more intolerant than declaring us
the worst
of living creatures, cursing
us and declaring
perpetual war against us? - When we share the facts outlined in point 9 above, we are accused
of negative stereotyping. Exposing
the fact that Allah commands Muslims to wage war against us, Moe
confirmed the imperative & implemented it and Islamic law codifies
it is not negative stereotyping, it is revealing objective factual
reality. It does not mean that every Muslim is violent, it means that
Islam requires every Muslim to pray for, pay for and or participate in
aggressive conquest. - Should being a made member of the Mafia carry a stigma?
Why then should membership in Moe’s war cult not carry a stigma? - Should members of the Mafia be subject to discrimination? Should they be closely
observed; suspected of criminal activity? Why then should members of
the cult which sanctifies
& celebrates terrorism not be suspected, observed
and excluded from our societies? - If incitement were to be combated, the
Qur’an would be outlawed. Of course, that is not the intention of the
resolution’s authors and few will read 8:65, 9:38-39, 9:123 & 61:10-12 to learn why it should be. The Motoons simply depicted Moe as a terrorist, which,
by his own admission, he was. They did not suggest that viewers should
assault or wage war upon Muslims. The associated violence was incited
by Imams in Mosques, not by the cartoonists or publisher. Fitna, the short documentary by Geert Wilders,
displayed the incitement contained in the Qur’an, which flows through
Mosques. Fitna did not incite violence, Imams did, resulting in
riots. They are demanding that all criticism of Islam be
outlawed, twisting and perverting language in the process.
CNN.Com’s European outlet has a reminder of what
the Secretary General said about Fitna, the documentary video by Geert
Wilders.
- “The
film was a deliberate act of discrimination against Muslims” that aimed
to “provoke unrest and intolerance,”
BBC
News informs us that Pakistan demanded prosecution.
said it told the Dutch ambassador that it was incumbent on the
Netherlands to prosecute Mr Wilders for defamation and deliberately
hurting Muslim sentiments, the official Associated Press of Pakistan
news agency reported.”
Wikipedia helps us to review the UN position.
After the
release of the film, a number of international organizations released
statements or otherwise responded to the film. United
Nations’ Secretary-General Ban
Ki-moon stated on
on March 28, 2008 that
I condemn, in the strongest terms, the airing of Geert Wilders’
offensively anti-Islamic film. There is no justification for hate
speech or incitement to violence. The right of free expression is not
at stake here. I acknowledge the efforts of the Government of the
Netherlands to stop the broadcast of this film, and appeal for calm to
those understandably offended by it. Freedom must always be accompanied
by social responsibility.[133][134]
- If they really gave a damn about violence
against persons based
on their religion, they would be acting to protect Christians in Muslim
dominated areas of Iraq, Egypt, Pakistan, Indonesia, Kenya, Nigeria and
other places where Christians are bombed, shot, burned and hacked to
death with impunity. - If there was any possibility of balanced & effective implementation the resolution, no Muslim
would vote for it because it would require the outlawing of
Islam. - Tolerance respect
for diversity? Really? Yeah, right. “Truly,
the religion with Allâh is Islâm“. “Allâh!
Lâ ilahâ illa Huwa (none has the right to be worshipped but He), ”-6- are forbidden to openly display wine or pork,
(A: to ring church bells or display crosses,) recite the Torah or
Evangel aloud, or make public display of their funerals and feastdays;-7- and are forbidden to build new churches.
- What right is more fundamental than the
right to life? “then
kill the Mushrikûn (see V.2:105) wherever you find them, and
capture them and besiege them, and prepare for them each and every
ambush.” “It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war
(and free them with ransom) until he had made a
great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land.” Get a clue: our
blood and property are not sacred to Muslims. - The sentence is unmitigated
hypocrisy. What did Ban Ki-moon say about Fitna? Something about “hate
speech” & “incitement”. Oh, yes, he said that freedom of expression
was “not involved:. Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu called it a
“deliberate act of discrimination” intended to “provoke unrest
and intolerance. Reality check: Fitna shows the violent
Qur’an verses side by side with the Imams who invoke them and the
resulting riots. Describing is not doing. - Like most Muslim screeds, this one is redundant. One lie must be
pointed out: discrimination. Reliance of
the Traveller is Islamic law. This provision affects conquered Jews
& Christians.Such non-Muslim subjects are obliged to
comply with Islamic rules that pertain to the safety and indemnity of
life, reputation, and property. In addition, they:-1- are penalized for committing adultery
or theft, thought not for drunkenness;-2- are distinguished from
Muslims in dress, wearing a wide cloth belt (zunnar);-3- are not greeted with
“as-Salamu ‘alaykum“;-4- must keep to the side of
the street;-5- may not build higher than
or as high as the Muslims’ buildings, though if they acquire a
tall house, it is not razed;-6- are forbidden to openly
display wine or pork, (A: to ring church bells or display crosses,)
recite the Torah or Evangel aloud, or make public display of their
funerals and feastdays;-7- and are forbidden to build new
churches.O11.6
They are forbidden to reside in
the Hijaz, meaning the area and towns around Mecca, Medina, and Yamama,
for more than three days when the caliph allows them to enter there for
something they need).O11.7
A non-Muslim may not enter the Meccan
Sacred Precinct (Haram) under any circumstances, or enter any
other mosque without permission (A: nor may Muslims enter churches
without their permission). - Diversity, yeah, right. Because
there is more than one “religion” in the world, we must not mention the
fact that one of them is a war cult, hellbent on conquering us, not a
legitimate religion. - Incitement to hatred? Muhammad
bragged about being made victorious with terror. Allah declared that he
would cast terror. Allah declared that he cast terror, resulting in the
death of the men of a Jewish settlement and the enslavement of their
widows and orphans. The fatal facts of Islam are truly worthy of hatred
and contempt but exposing them is not incitement. - Those of us who have become familiar with the damnable doctrines
& practices of Islam have a responsibility
to share our knowledge with our fellows and to encourage them to read
Islam’s canon of scripture, tradition, exegesis &
jurisprudence. There is no responsibility to be silent or soft
pedal the truth. - Examine the resolution’s
call to action :5. Notes the speech given by
Secretary-General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference at the
fifteenth session of the Human Rights Council, and draws on his call on
States to take the following actions to foster a domestic
environment of religious tolerance, peace and respect, by:(a)
Encouraging the creation of collaborative networks to build mutual
understanding, promoting dialogue and inspiring constructive action
towards shared policy goals and the pursuit of tangible outcomes, such
as servicing projects in the fields of education, health, conflict
prevention, employment, integration and media education;(b)
Creating an appropriate
mechanism within Governments to, inter alia, identify and
address potential areas of tension between members of different
religious communities, and assisting with conflict prevention and
mediation;(c)
Encouraging training of Government officials in effective outreach
strategies;(d)
Encouraging the efforts of leaders to discuss within their communities
the causes of discrimination, and evolving strategies to counter these
causes;(e) Speaking out against
intolerance, including advocacy of religious
hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or
violence;(f) Adopting measures to criminalize
incitement to imminent violence based on religion or belief; {Review
the definitions implicit in criticisms of Fitna and the Motoons!!!}(g)
Understanding the need to combat denigration and negative religious
stereotyping of persons, as well as incitement to religious hatred, by strategizing and
harmonizing actions at the local, national, regional and
international levels through, inter alia, education
and awareness-building; {Indoctrination.}(h)
Recognizing that the open, constructive and respectful debate of ideas,
as well as interfaith and intercultural dialogue at the local, national
and international levels, can play a positive role in combating
religious hatred, incitement and violence;6. Calls upon all States:
(a) To
take effective
measures to ensure that public functionaries in the conduct of
their public duties do not discriminate against an individual on the
basis of religion or belief;(b) To
foster religious freedom and pluralism by promoting the ability of
members of all religious communities to manifest their religion, and to
contribute openly and on an equal footing to society;(c) To
encourage the representation and meaningful participation of
individuals, irrespective of their religion, in all sectors of society;(d) To
make a strong
effort to counter religious profiling, which is understood to be
the invidious use of religion as a criterion in conducting
questionings, searches and other law enforcement investigative
procedures;7. Encourages States to consider
providing updates on efforts made in this regard as part of ongoing
reporting to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for
Human Rights;8. Calls upon States to adopt
measures and policies to promote the full respect for and protection of
places of worship and religious sites, cemeteries and shrines, and to
take measures in cases where they are vulnerable to vandalism or
destruction;9. Calls for strengthened
international efforts to foster a global dialogue for the promotion of
a culture of tolerance and peace at all levels, based on respect for
human rights and diversity of religions and beliefs, and decides to
convene a panel discussion on this issue at its seventeenth session,
within existing resources.
Hillary Clinton’s big lie: Combating Discrimination…
Our secretary of State, SCIRI and Human Rights First are prancing about with excrement faced grins, chortling over their great victory, how they put one over on the OIC and defeated a resolution inimical to our right of free expression.
No, we have no victory; we have a defeat, engineered by those sworn to protect us. Instead, they bent down, lifted Satan’s tail and planted a big wet kiss.
Secretary of State
Adoption of Resolution at Human Rights Council Combating Discrimination and Violence
The United States welcomes today’s action by the UN Human Rights Council to further the international community’s efforts to combat religious intolerance. The consensus resolution adopted by the Council today represents a significant step forward in the global dialogue on countering intolerance, discrimination, and violence against persons based upon religion or belief. We appreciate the leadership shown by the Organization of the Islamic Conference and member states on today’s landmark achievement.
The United States strongly supports today’s resolution, which rejects the broad prohibitions on speech called for in the former “defamation of religions” resolution, and supports approaches that do not limit freedom of expression or infringe on the freedom of religion. This resolution demonstrates a desire to move the debate on these shared challenges in a constructive and affirmative direction. Our divides can be bridged through an effort to listen to each other and to seek common ground. This resolution is a direct result of this type of engagement with the global community.
Today’s adoption of this resolution by the UN Human Rights Council is an important statement that must be followed by sustained commitment. At a time when violence and discrimination against members of religious minorities is all too common, we urge the international community to continue to uphold the freedoms enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. As I said last month in Geneva, we must support those who are willing to stand up on behalf of the rights we cherish.
religious intolerance
3:118. O you who believe! Take not as (your) Bitânah (advisors, consultants, protectors, helpers, friends, etc.) those outside your religion (pagans, Jews, Christians, and hypocrites) since they will not fail to do their best to corrupt you. They desire to harm you severely. Hatred has already appeared from their mouths, but what their breasts conceal is far worse. Indeed We have made plain to you the Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses) if you understand.
Please show me exactly how the resolution combats that; post relevant, verifiable facts in the comments.
discrimination
Such non-Muslim subjects are obliged to comply with Islamic rules that pertain to the safety and indemnity of life, reputation, and property. In addition, they:
-1- are penalized for committing adultery or theft, thought not for drunkenness;
-2- are distinguished from Muslims in dress, wearing a wide cloth belt (zunnar);
-3- are not greeted with “as-Salamu ‘alaykum”;
-4- must keep to the side of the street;
-5- may not build higher than or as high as the Muslims’ buildings, though if they acquire a tall house, it is not razed;
-6- are forbidden to openly display wine or pork, (A: to ring church bells or display crosses,) recite the Torah or Evangel aloud, or make public display of their funerals and feastdays;
-7- and are forbidden to build new churches.
Please show me exactly how the resolution reduces discrimination against Jews & Christians living under the heel of Islam in Pakistan & Egypt. Who shall enforce it and how?
violence against persons
9:29. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
9:123. O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allâh is with those who are the Al-Muttaqûn (the pious – see V.2:2).
Please show me exactly how the resolution combats Allah’s jihad imperatives. Does it repeal Allah’s words? Who will enforce it, and how?
landmark achievement
Instead of having an honest debate and roll call vote which would probably reflect diminished support for the “defamation of Islam” construct, you accepted a dishonest “compromise” which altered the language without changing the meaning and effect of the resolution.
expression and the full respect for the freedom to seek, receive and impart information can
play in strengthening democracy and combating religious intolerance,
Kindly elaborate on the positive role of free expression in combating intolerance. Under the first amendment, I have a right to truthfully write and publish the fact that Islam snctifies rape, pillage & plunder in the process of world conquest. The Secretary General of the resolution’s sponsor will tell you that my truthful expression defames Islam and negatively stereotypes Muslims and that you must pass laws to prohibit it.
When Geert Wilders uttered & published the same fatal fact in his short documentary, Fitna, Ban Ki-moon declared it to be “hate speech” & “incitement of violence”, not involving the right of free expression.
If the general public knew the full truth about Islam, they wound not tolerate it. Truthful expression about Islam militates against tolerance of the intolerable. The intent of the paragraph quoted above is to stifle free expression, not encourage it.
That excerpt, properly viewed, reveals a great deal. What is uttered about the war cult reflects on its membership, jointly and severally. If Islam mandates genocidal conquest, then what of Muslims? Perhaps the Qur’an will enlighten you.
9:120. It was not becoming of the people of Al-Madinah and the bedouins of the neighbourhood to remain behind Allâh’s Messenger (Muhammad when fighting in Allâh’s Cause) and (it was not becoming of them) to prefer their own lives to his life. That is because they suffer neither thirst nor fatigue, nor hunger in the Cause of Allâh, nor they take any step to raise the anger of disbelievers nor inflict any injury upon an enemy but is written to their credit as a deed of righteousness. Surely, Allâh wastes not the reward of the Muhsinûn
Believers fight in Allah’s cause (world conquest) killing and being killed. Any step they take to enrage or injure a disbeliever is imputed to them as a good deed. We can not expose the evil at the core of Islam without exposing Muslims as the agents of Satan who do and applaud evil acts.
Exactly what are they complaining about? I highlighted the crucial clauses, read it again, read it repeatedly until it sinks in. They express deep concern about “creating and perpetuating negative stereotypes about religious groups”. To fully comprehend the enormity of the resolution, you need to recall a boiler plate expression from previous resolutions: “Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with terrorism and human rights violations.” Does that ring a bell? Can you connect the dots?
- negative profiling and stigmatization of persons based on their religion
- creating and perpetuating negative stereotypes about religious groups
Those arrogant, condescending Muslims, bureaucrats & politicians are convinced that we are too stupid to comprehend the big lie they are putting over on us.
- incidents of religious intolerance, discrimination and related violence
- negative stereotyping of individuals on the basis of religion or belief
- advocacy of religious hatred
- constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence
- urges States to take effective measures
“Religious intolerance” is a code phrase for criticism of Islam; “negative stereotyping…” is a parallel code phrase. “Advocacy of religious hatred” is another. “Incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence” is gilding the turd. “Effective measures” is a code phrase for prohibitive legislation to criminalize criticism of Islam.
Recall what they said about Fitna and the Motoons. Recall what they said and are saying about burning the Qur’an. It is not possible to tell the truth about Islam without violating their resolution.
Recall what the Secretary General of the United Nations said about Fitna. Reuters quotes U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon about Fitna:
“There is no justification for hate speech or incitement to violence,” Ban said in a statement. “The right of free expression is not at stake here.”
By the U.N.’s own definition of terms, exemplified by the Secretary General, the resolution demands that revelation of facts about Islam be criminalized. There is no real, effective difference between the stated offenses:
- defamation of Islam
- denigration of Islam
- vilification of Islam
- negative stereotyping of Islam
- negative stereotyping of individuals based on religion.
The primary demand was and remains the criminalization of all criticism and questioning of the doctrines & practices of Islam.
Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization
Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization
This three page draft resolution is dated 03/21/11, considerably post
deadline. The database shows it as being submitted on the 18th, one day
late.
Despite its length and due to the target rich environment it presents,
I reproduce the entire draft resolution, with superscripts linked to my
commentary which follows the text of the draft. To
read my comments in coordination with the text,
click the superscript and use your back button to return to the text.
Article 19 & CHRS have published a call for member states to vote for this resolution.
The resolution represents a change of tactics, not strategic
objectives. It is designed to deceive human rights activists, and it
appears to be a success.
It is probable that the resolution will be debated
and adopted Thursday or Friday of this week, too soon to mount an
effective opposition. This blog post will stand as a model for rebuttal
when the resolution is repeated next year. Please follow the
links and take maximum advantage of the information provided.
Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization
of, and discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence
against persons based on religion or belief
Sixteenth session
Agenda item 9
Racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related
form of intolerance, follow-up and implementation
of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action
Pakistan (on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference):
draft resolution 16/…
Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization
of, and discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence
against persons based on religion or belief1
The Human Rights Council,
Reaffirming the commitment made by all States under the Charter of the
United
Nations to promote and encourage universal respect for and observance
of all human rights
and fundamental freedoms without distinction as to, inter alia,
religion or belief,
Reaffirming also the obligation of States to prohibit discrimination on
the basis of
religion or belief and to implement measures to guarantee the equal and
effective protection
of the law,
Reaffirming further that the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights
provides, inter alia, that everyone shall have the right to freedom of
thought, conscience and
religion or belief, which shall include freedom to have or to adopt a
religion or belief of his
choice2, and
freedom, either individually or in community with others
and in public or
private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance,
practice3
and teaching,
Reaffirming the positive role that the exercise of the right to freedom
of opinion and
expression and the full respect for the freedom to seek, receive and
impart information can
play in strengthening democracy and combating religious intolerance,4
Deeply concerned about incidents of intolerance5,
discrimination6
and
violence
against persons based on their religion7 or belief in all regions of the
world,
Deploring any advocacy of discrimination or violence on the basis of
religion or
belief,8
Strongly deploring all acts of violence against persons on the basis of
their religion
or belief, as well as any such acts directed against their homes,
businesses, properties,
schools, cultural centres or places of worship,9
Concerned about actions that willfully exploit tensions or target
individuals on the
basis of their religion or belief,
Noting with deep concern the instances of intolerance, discrimination
and acts of
violence in many parts of the world, including cases motivated by
discrimination against
persons belonging to religious minorities, in addition to the negative
projection of the
followers of religions and the enforcement of measures that
specifically discriminate
against persons on the basis of religion or belief,
Recognizing the valuable contribution of people of all religions or
beliefs to
humanity and the contribution that dialogue among religious groups can
make towards
improved awareness and understanding of the common values shared by all
humankind,
Recognizing also that working together to enhance implementation of
existing legal
regimes that protect individuals against discrimination and hate
crimes, increase interfaith
and intercultural efforts, and to expand human rights education are
important first steps in
combating incidents of intolerance, discrimination and violence against
individuals on the
basis of religion or belief,
continued serious instances of derogatory
stereotyping, negative profiling and stigmatization10 of
persons based on
their religion or
beliefs, as well as programmes and agendas pursued by extremist
organizations and groups11
aimed at creating and perpetuating negative stereotypes about religious
groups, in particular
when condoned by Governments;
of religious intolerance, discrimination
and related violence, as well as of negative stereotyping of
individuals on the basis of
religion or belief continue to rise around the world, and condemns, in
this context, any
advocacy of religious hatred against individuals that constitutes
incitement to
discrimination, hostility or violence12, and urges States to take
effective measures, as set forth
in this resolution, consistent with their obligations under
international human rights law, to
address and combat such incidents;13
hatred that constitutes incitement to
discrimination, hostility or violence, whether it involves the use of
print, audio-visual or
electronic media or any other means;12
debate of ideas, as well as interfaith and
intercultural dialogue at the local, national and international levels
can be among the best
protections against religious intolerance, and can play a positive role
in strengthening
democracy and combating religious hatred, and convinced that a
continuing dialogue on
these issues can help overcome existing misperceptions;14
Secretary-General of the Organization of the
Islamic Conference, Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, at the fifteenth session of
the Human Rights
Council, and draws on his call on States to take the following actions
to foster a domestic
environment of religious tolerance, peace and respect, by:
collaborative networks to build mutual
understanding, promoting dialogue and inspiring constructive action
towards shared policy
goals and the pursuit of tangible outcomes, such as servicing projects
in the fields of
education, health, conflict prevention, employment, integration and
media education;
(b) Creating an appropriate mechanism within the government to, inter
alia,
identify and address potential areas of tension between members of
different religious
communities, and assisting with conflict prevention and mediation;
(c) Encouraging training of government officials in effective outreach
strategies;
(d) Encouraging efforts of leaders to discuss within their communities
causes of
discrimination and evolving strategies to counter these causes;
(e) Speaking out against intolerance, including advocacy of religious
hatred that
constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence;
(f) Adopting measures to criminalize incitement to imminent violence
based on
religion or belief;15
(g) Understanding the need to combat denigration and negative religious
stereotyping of persons, as well as incitement to religious hatred, by
strategizing and
harmonizing actions at the local, national, regional and international
levels through, inter
alia, education16
and awareness-building;
(h) Recognizing that the open, constructive and respectful debate of
ideas, as
well as interfaith and intercultural dialogue at the local, national
and international levels,
can play a positive role in combating religious hatred, incitement and
violence;
6. Calls upon all States:
the conduct
of their public duties do not discriminate against an individual on the
basis of religion or
belief;
(b) To foster religious freedom and pluralism by promoting the ability
of
members of all religious communities to manifest their religion, and to
contribute openly
and on an equal footing to the society;
(c) To encourage representation and meaningful participation of
individuals,
irrespective of their religion, in all sectors of society;
(d) To undertake a strong effort to counter religious profiling, which
is
understood to be the invidious use of religion as a criterion in
conducting questionings,
searches and other law enforcement investigative procedures;17
7. Encourages States to consider providing updates on efforts made in
this
regard as part of ongoing reporting to the Office of the United Nations
High Commissioner
for Human Rights;
8. Calls upon States to adopt measures and policies to promote the full
respect
and protection for places of worship and religious sites, cemeteries
and shrines, and to take
measures in cases where they are vulnerable to vandalism or destruction;
9. Calls for strengthened international efforts to foster a global
dialogue for the
promotion of a culture of tolerance and peace at all levels, based on
respect for human
rights and diversity of religions and beliefs, and decides to convene a
panel discussion on
this issue at its seventeenth session within existing resources
- This sentence contains the main change: from combating
defamation of Islam to Muslims; from the institution to its members.
That is a change in tactics, not strategic
objective. The goal remains unchanged: to erect a legislative
shield to protect Islam from all questioning and criticism, consistent
with Shari’ah, which prescribes the death penaltyA for
‘reviling’ Allah, Moe & their war cult. B
Muslims are supposed to be stigmatized individually by accurately
describing the accursed doctrines of the war cult which enslaves them
to Satan. Thus, every exposure,questioning & criticism of
Islamic doctrines will be held to ‘stigmatize’ Muslims, an act to be
prohibited by law.‘Incitement’ will be defined broadly, as in Ban
Ki-moon’s condemnationC
of Geert Wilders’ short documentary, Fitna, which exposes, but does not
constitute incitement to violence. The MotoonsD a graphic
depiction of Islamic jihad-terrorism also exposed incitemenht, but are
themselves, not an example of incitement. - ICCPR,
Article 18, ¶2
implies, but does not clearly state, the right to disaffiliate from one
religion and adopt another. International consensus on that right is
impossible because Islam prescribes the death penalty for apostasy.
Refer to the relevant Islamic law.A - Manifestation & practice of Islam is
problematic because participation in offensive wars of conquestE is ordained
for MuslimsF
and is their essential life missionG. Islam is inseverable, Muslims
are not empowered to select what they like and reject the violent parts.H It
is not possible to practice Islam peacefully in the long run. - “Combating religious intolerance” is
assumed to be a good thing. Why should anyone tolerate a ‘religion’
that asserts a demonic mandate–right & duty to conquer him and
enslave his widow & orphansI?
Why
should anyone tolerate a ‘religion’ that imputes any step taken to
“injure” or “raise the anger of” a disbeliever to the believer’s credit
as a “deed
of righteousness”J?The citation of the right to freedom of
expression is deliberately
deceptive because the intent of this resolution is to criminalize any
and every expression that questions or criticizes the doctrines &
practices of Islam. How, exactly, will freedom of expression
combat
intolerance? The unstated premise of this and all similar
resolutions,
including the preceding resolutions “combating defamation of religions”
is that all questioning & criticism of Islam constitutes
incitement, intolerance & hate speech. - Muslims are so “deeply concerned” about ‘intolerance”
that its holy scripture declares it intensely intolerant of all rival
religions so that if anyone chooses another religion, “it will never be
accepted of him”K. - Muslims are so “deeply concerned” about ‘discrimination’
that their Shari’ah dictates that conquered Christians living under
Islamic domination are prohibited from making public processions,
prayers or funerals, ringing bells, displaying crosses and building
churches.L - Muslims are so “deeply concerned” about violence
based on the victim’s religion that their holy scripture , oral
tradition & Shari’ah mandate & exemplify offensive wars of
conquest against pagans, Jews, Christians & Zoroastrians.M - How can you be a Muslim while deploring
Islam? This is the Acme of hypocrisy or cognitive dissonance! M
- If you deplore the burning of homes &
churches and
the killing of Christians & other minorities in Nigeria,
Afghanistan, Pakistan, Indonesia & Egypt, why do you remain
affiliated with the war cult that inculcates hatred and incites those
acts? - Deep concern about “derogatory stereotyping,
negative profiling and stigmatization”? Are you concerned about your
own scripture and Shari’ah? N - They are complaining about the Dutch PVV and
similar political parties in Austria, Germany Switzerland and
elsewhere. They want such parties outlawed. - They just condemned Islam’s own canon of
scripture, tradition, biography & jurisprudence! - That is a demand for legislation
outlawing “negative stereotyping’, which translates to all questioning
and criticism of Islamic doctrines and practices, including this blog
post informing you about their outrageous arrogant demands. - If the interlocutors had sufficient knowledge of Islamic doctrine
and courage to expose it, such dialogue might disabuse a few people of
the mis-perception that Islam is the
“religion of peace”. - This is derived from the boilerplate
demands for criminalization of ‘defamation of Islam’. It encompasses
all negative expression about Islam. Review the exemplary statement by
Ban Ki-moon quoted below.C - They demand that we convert our schools into Islamic indoctrination centers, a process that is
already underway. - Consider the most recent mass casualty
attacks, both successful and interdicted. What was the affiliation of
the perpetrators? How many of them were not Muslims? Islam
inculcates hatred and incites violence. It promises participants
admission to a celestial bordelloO and threatens shirkers with
eternity in HellP.
Muslims are commanded to wage war against us and rewarded for any
injury they inflict. Of course it is unreasonable to be
suspicious of them. Yeah, right.
- Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 8, ¶1.
- ibid, Book O, Chapter 8, ¶7.
- Reuters quotes U.N. Secretary General Ban
Ki-moon about Fitna:“There is no justification for
hate speech or incitement to violence,” Ban said in a statement. “The
right of free expression is not at stake here.” - View the Motoons
- Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 9, ¶0 pg. 617
- Noble Qur’an, Surah Al-Baqarah, Ayah 216.
- ibid, Surah
At-Taubah, ayah 111 - ibid,Surah Al-Baqarah, Ayah 85
- ibid, Surah Surah Al-Ahzab, Ayah 26
- Noble Qur’an, Surah At-Taubah, Ayah 120
- ibid, Surah Al-Imran , Aya 85
- Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 11 , ¶5
- Noble Qur’an, Surah Al-Anfal, Ayah 39
ibid, Surah At-Taubah, Ayah 29
- Noble Qur’an, Surah Al-Baiyyinah, Ayah 6
Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 11, ¶5,
items 2-7 - Noble Qur’an, Surah As-Saff, Ayat 10-12 ibid, Surah Surah An-Naba’ , Ayah 31
- Ibid, Surah At-Taubah, Ayat 38-39
Geert Wilders Trial: Truth is No Defense
Google published an article from Canada Free Press about recent developments in the trial of Geert Wilders. One prosecutorial qoute stands out like sore thumb and must be addressed. Thanks and a tip of the hat to Jihad Watch.
The relevant statutory provisions are revealed in the summons. Expressions which “insult a group of people” and/or ” incites hatred or discrimination” against them are arbitrarily prohibited. No defenses are allowed.
If Muslims, motivated by the normative doctrines of Islam enshrined in the Qur’an and exemplified by Muhammad’s Sunnah, murder film makers, assault homosexuals, threaten members of parliament and pose an existential threat to the cultural identity and continuance of a free & democratic Netherlands, public disclosure of the facts is prohibited and can not be excused on grounds of necessity.
Besides mandating national suicide, the prosecutor has a severe cognitive dissonance problem. She moved for dismissal of charges of insulting Muslims because the insult was to Islamic ideology, not to Muslims. If the insult was to Islam, then the incitement & discrimination must also be against Islam, not Muslims. All of the charges should be dropped, they should never have been filed.
Blogroll
- Above the Storm
- Act! for America Northern Virginia/ Metro. D.C. Chpt. Blog
- Aldaynet
- American Daily Review
- American Israeli Patriot
- Bare Naked Islam
- Blacktygrrrr
- Blue Star Chronicles
- Canadian Kaffir
- Conservative Libertarian Outpost
- Conservative Majority
- Crusader's Armory
- Democrat Equals Socialist
- eloi vs diablo
- Foreign and Domestic DT
- Forest Opine
- Francois Tremblay's Wordpress
- Freedom’s Lighthouse
- Gamecock
- Gateway Pundit
- Go Burn With Muhammad
- Halt Terrorism
- Hillbilly White Trash
- IMAO
- Impeach Obama!
- Islamophobes United
- Islamophobia: Exposing Malicious Malarkey
- Judge Right New Site
- Judge Right VOX site
- Judge Right’s Blogspot
- Jules Crttenden
- Keepin’ It Real
- LeftCoast RightWinger
- Libertarian Philosophy
- Little Green Footballs
- Maddie’s Musings
- Maggie’s Notebook
- Moe’s Murder Cult
- Phoenix Imam
- Political Pit Bull
- Politico Dot Com
- rddrdg
- Red State
- Refzip Search & Promotion
- Right Truth
- Sick and Tired Americans
- Sons of Apes and Pigs
- Speculative
- Stop Card Check!!!
- Stop Her Now
- The Elephant Bar
- The Right Is Right
- The Volokh Conspiracy
- World Court petition to ban Islam.
- Yoni the Blogger
Visits
Stat Counter
var sc_project=4119066; var sc_invisible=0; var sc_partition=49; var sc_click_stat=1; var sc_security="53704337";Alpha Inventions
Feedjit
Ummat al-Kuffar
Snooper's Picks
Recent Comments
