Freedom Ain’t Free & Take Our Country Back

VICTORY Is Not Defeat

Elimination of Racism and ‘Related Intolerance’


While fools and liars continue singing the praises of the Human Rights Council & OIC for abandoning the ‘Defamation of Religions [Islam]’ meme, the UN published one of the resolutions that went through the General Assembly like grease through a goose December 19  ’12: A/RES/66/144

Take note of the innocuous title; who can oppose the worthy cause of eliminating racism?

Global efforts for the total elimination of racism, racial
discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and
the comprehensive implementation of and follow-up to
the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action

The devil is in the details.  I highlighted a key phrase and clauses in the title; the evils they conceal while including by reference  make the resolution unacceptable.   The bureaucrats redefined racism: it no longer simply denotes irrational and invidious hatred of dark shinned people; it now connotes rational and well founded opposition to Islam.

Racism is explicitly redefined to include ‘Islamophobia’ in a preliminary report created in the preparatory stages of the second Durban Conference.

4.  Emphasizes the urgent need to address the scourges of anti-Semitism, Christianophobia, and Islamophobia as contemporaryforms of racism as well as racial and violent movements based on racism and discriminatory ideas directed at African, Arab, Christian, Jewish, Muslim and other communities;[Preliminary document of the African Regional Conference Preparatory to the Durban Review Conference]

Re-read that quotation with special attention to the highlighted words and phrases.  There is nothing racial about opposition to Islam. There are Black, White and Asian Muslims; Islam is not a race.  Islam is an ideology, system of laws  and military force to spread and establish it.

‘Related intolerance’, included in the boiler plate of numerous resolutions, translates to ‘Islamophobia’. The global effort is to eliminate ‘Islamophobia’. Its intent is to criminalize and punish rejection of and opposition to Islam.

The phrase “comprehensive implementation of” in the third line of the title applies to the Durban Declaration. Who is familiar with its contents?  Here  is a clear demand for the enactment & enforcement of legislation to criminalize  the formation of anti-Islamic political parties.

150. Calls upon States, in opposing all forms of racism, to recognize the need to
counter anti-Semitism, anti-Arabism and Islamophobia world-wide, and urges all States to take
effective measures to prevent the emergence of movements based on racism and discriminatory
ideas concerning these communities;

The Durban Declaration also demands that we not scrutinize those most likely to engage in terrorism. The perpetrators of the Accursed Abomination were young Muslim males, not little old ladies.

72. Urges States to design, implement and enforce effective measures to eliminate the
phenomenon popularly known as “racial profiling” and comprising the practice of police and
other law enforcement officers relying, to any degree, on race, colour, descent or national or
ethnic origin as the basis for subjecting persons to investigatory activities or for determining
whether an individual is engaged in criminal activity;

The Durban Declaration also demands censorship, including of the internet.

89. We note with regret that certain media, by promoting false images and negative
stereotypes of vulnerable individuals or groups of individuals, particularly of migrants and
refugees, have contributed to the spread of xenophobic and racist sentiments among the public
and in some cases have encouraged violence by racist individuals and groups;
90. We recognize the positive contribution that the exercise of the right to freedom of
expression, particularly by the media and new technologies, including the Internet, and full
respect for the freedom to seek, receive and impart information can make to the fight against
racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance; we reiterate the need to respect
the editorial independence and autonomy of the media in this regard;
91. We express deep concern about the use of new information technologies, such as
the Internet, for purposes contrary to respect for human values, equality, non-discrimination,
respect for others and tolerance, including to propagate racism, racial hatred, xenophobia, racial
discrimination and related intolerance, and that, in particular, children and youth having access
to this material could be negatively influenced by it;

145. Urges States to implement legal sanctions, in accordance with relevant
international human rights law, in respect of incitement to racial hatred through new information
and communications technologies, including the Internet, and further urges them to apply all
relevant human rights instruments to which they are parties, in particular the International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, to racism on the Internet;
146. Urges States to encourage the media to avoid stereotyping based on racism, racial
discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance;
147. Calls upon States to consider the following, taking fully into account existing
international and regional standards on freedom of expression, while taking all necessary
measures to guarantee the right to freedom of opinion and expression:
(a) Encouraging Internet service providers to establish and disseminate specific
voluntary codes of conduct and self-regulatory measures against the dissemination of racist
messages and those that result in racial discrimination, xenophobia or any form of intolerance
and discrimination; to that end, Internet providers are encouraged to set up mediating bodies at
national and international levels, involving relevant civil society institutions;
(b) Adopting and applying, to the extent possible, appropriate legislation for
prosecuting those responsible for incitement to racial hatred or violence through the new
information and communications technologies, including the Internet;

What is the meaning of incitement to racial hatred or violence?  How are those terms evaluated in the real world?  According to Ban Ki-moon, they include exposing the nexus between Islamic doctrines expressed in Islamic scripture & tradition and Islamic violence in terrorism & rioting.

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.”

The Secretary General explicitly said that Geert Wilders had no right to utter & publish Fitna, which displayed Islamic doctrines of jihad beside video of rabble rousing sermons and pictures of the resulting havoc.  The texts cited by Wilders are documented in this blog post: https://snooper.wordpress.com/2008/03/27/fitna-supporting-documentation/

A/RES/66/144 ‘s threat to free expression is not limited to its inclusion by reference of the Durban Declaration.

6. Expresses deep concern at inadequate responses to emerging and
resurgent forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance,
and urges States to adopt measures to address those scourges vigorously with a view
to preventing their practice and protecting victims;
7. Underlines the imperative need to address all the contemporary forms
and manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related
intolerance, which include, inter alia, incitement to such hatred, racial profiling and
the propagation of racist and xenophobic acts through cyberspace, with a view to
maximizing protection for victims, providing legal remedies and combating
impunity;
8. Stresses that States and international organizations have a responsibility
to ensure that measures taken in the struggle against terrorism do not discriminate in
purpose or effect on grounds of race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin,
and urges all States to rescind or refrain from all forms of racial profiling;
9. Recognizes that States should implement and enforce appropriate and
effective legislative, judicial, regulatory and administrative measures to prevent and
protect against acts of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related
intolerance, thereby contributing to the prevention of human rights violations;

¶ 11 on page 4 is very clear.

11. Reaffirms that any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that
constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by
law, and also reaffirms that the dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or
hatred, or incitement to racial discrimination, as well as all acts of violence or
incitement to such acts, shall be declared offences punishable by law, in accordance
with the international obligations of States, and that those prohibitions are
consistent with freedom of opinion and expression;

The Secy’. Gen’l. labeled Fitna hate speech & incitement not protected by the right of freedom of expression.  Take a clear eyed look at the last sentence in ¶ 11 above.  It says that prohibitions on advocacy of religious hatred are consistent with freedom of expression.  Fitna is an exposure of religious hatred, it is not advocacy of hatred!  The enemies of liberty invert facts, law and morality. There is no truth or virtue in them.

14. Calls upon all States, in accordance with the commitments undertaken in
paragraph 147 of the Durban Programme of Action, to take all measures necessary
to combat incitement to violence motivated by racial hatred, including through the
misuse of print, audiovisual and electronic media and new communications
technologies, and, in collaboration with service providers, to promote the use of
such technologies, including the Internet, to contribute to the fight against racism, in
conformity with international standards of freedom of expression and taking all
measures necessary to guarantee that right;

¶ 15 demands that we convert our schools into Islamic indoctrination centers; inculcating tolerance of intolerable evil. .

15. Encourages all States to include in their educational curricula and social
programmes at all levels, as appropriate, knowledge of and tolerance and respect for
all cultures, civilizations, religions, peoples and countries, as well as information on
the follow-up to and implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of
Action;

The resolution also alludes to an ad hoc committee of the HRC, without revealing its mandate.

Taking note of Human Rights Council decision 3/103 of 8 December 2006,2 by
which, heeding the decision and instruction of the World Conference, the Council
established the Ad Hoc Committee of the Human Rights Council on the Elaboration
of Complementary Standards,
Noting also the progress made during the third session of the Ad Hoc
Committee on the Elaboration of Complementary Standards, held in Geneva on 22
and 23 November 2010 and from 11 to 21 April 2011, and noting further the
convening of the fourth session, to be held in Geneva during 2012,

64. Requests the Secretary-General to provide the resources necessary for the
effective fulfilment of the mandates of […] the Ad Hoc Committee on the Elaboration of Complementary Standards

The committee’s mandate is to code a binding protocol to ICERD which will incorporate therein criminalization of everything the OIC is kvetching about: Fitna, the Motoons, International Burn the Koran Day, International Judge the Koran Day and every negative statement about Allah, Moe and their damnable war cult.   Their next meeting begins April 10.  Unlike these resolutions, the protocol will be binding and enforcible.  If you would like to know more about it, make good use of these resources:

March 29, 2012 Posted by | Islam, Political Correctness, United Nations | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Elimination of Racism and Related Intolerance


The sixty-fourth session Third Committee Agenda item 67 (a) Elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance A/C.3/64/L.53. echoes certain of its predecessors.   After the customary bs boilerplate& arcane references to external documents, they get down to brass tacks.[Emphasis added, spelling original.]

15. Reaffirms also that, as underlined in paragraph 13 of the outcome document of the Durban Review Conference, any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law, that the dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority,  hatred, acts of violence or incitement to such acts shall be declared offences punishable by law, and that these prohibitions are consistent with freedom of opinion and expression;

13. Reaffirms that any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law; reaffirms further that all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination as well as all acts of violence or incitement to such acts shall be declared offence punishable by law, in accordance with the international obligations of States and that these prohibitions are consistent with freedom of opinion and expression; [http://www.un.org/durbanreview2009/pdf/Durban_Review_outcome_document_En.pdf]

16. Underlines at the same time the positive role that the exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, as well as the full respect for the freedom to seek, receive and impart information, can play in combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance;

17. Encourages those States that have made reservations to article 4 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination to give serious consideration to withdrawing such reservations as a matter of priority;

Article 4

States Parties condemn all propaganda and all organizations which are based on ideas or theories of superiority of one race or group of persons of one colour or ethnic origin, or which attempt to justify or promote racial hatred and discrimination in any form, and undertake to adopt immediate and positive measures designed to eradicate all incitement to, or acts of, such discrimination and, to this end, with due regard to the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in article 5 of this Convention, inter alia:

(a) Shall declare an offence punishable by law all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination, as well as all acts of violence or incitement to such acts against any race or group of persons of another colour or ethnic origin, and also the provision of any assistance to racist activities, including the financing thereof;

(b) Shall declare illegal and prohibit organizations, and also organized and all other propaganda activities, which promote and incite racial discrimination, and shall recognize participation in such organizations or activities as an offence punishable by law;

(c) Shall not permit public authorities or public institutions, national or local, to promote or incite racial discrimination.

The United States of America does not regard the Convention as creating any obligation incompatible with the United States Constitution. It does not accept any obligation to enact measures under Article 4, which it views these as incompatible with freedom of expression, or under Articles 2, 3, and 5 with respect to private conduct. The Convention is not self-executing in US law.[4] [Wikipedia]   [Emphasis added.]

¶15 quotes and cites ¶13 of the outcome document of the Durban Review Conference. In reading that text, recall the  report of the preliminary meeting, which equates criticism of Islam with racism: “anti-Semitism, Christianophobia, and Islamophobia as contemporary forms of racism”.

The terms therein referenced require clear definition.

  • advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred
  • constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence
  • ideas based on racial superiority,
    • hatred,
    • acts of violence or incitement to such acts

Those terms are broadly defined by the OIC and its factotum. Examine the Secretary General’s condemnation of 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.” [Emphasis added for clarity.]

A 17 minute documentary video which displays verses from the Qur’an, rabble rousing sermons by Muslim clerics and the results thereof is:

  • hate speech
  • incitement to violence.

By that standard, all negative exposure of Islamic doctrines & practices must be outlawed. We must not state the fact that Islamic scripture declared war on us, Islamic tradition makes it perpetual, and the outcome, as it relates to Jews is genocidal. How can we defend ourselves if we  are prohibited by law from revealing the identity, intentions, motivation & actions of the enemy which assails us?

¶16 is an Orwellian way of telling us that only expression that praises Islam and conceal its intentions and effects can be permitted. ¶17 is a demand that we yield our First Amendment right to free speech to Islam’s blasphemy law.

I invite all parties to carefully consider ICERD’s fourth article, which is reproduced above. The signatories condemn all propaganda and organizations based on ideas of racial superiority.  But  racial no longer applies only to skin color, it applies to religion since Durban II conflated them. Those nations which signed ICERD must condemn all propaganda and organizations based on ideas of religious superiority.   Of course, you don’t have a clue. I will give you one.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 80:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Verse:–“You (true Muslims) are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind.” means, the best of peoples for the people, as you bring them with chains on their necks till they embrace Islam.

3:110 declares Muslims to be the best of peoples, clearly an expression of religious superiority.  As Muslims and their factotums define the term, that is racial superiority, which must be condemned.

Sub paragraph a compels signatories to proscribe by law:

  • all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred
  • incitement to racial discrimination
  • all acts of violence or incitement to such acts

Recalling the conflation of race with religion, (a) requires the outlawing of the Qur’an because it is based on religious (racial) superiority and incites violence against people of other religions (races).

Sub paragraph b requires signatories to proscribe by law:

  • organizations which promote racial discrimination
  • all acts of violence or incitement to such acts against any race or group of persons of another colour or ethnic origin

Bearing in mind the conflation of race with religion, Islam must be proscribed by law because it declares war on pagans, Jews & Christians and discriminates against conquered Jews & Christians by imposing a special tax on them and placing them under extraordinary legal & social limitations which are specified in Islamic law. Doubters & dissenters should turn to Reliance of the Traveller O9.8,  O9.9 & O11.5.

Of course, ICERD specifies race, it does not specify religion. But ICERD is not the only applicable international human rights covenant.

ICCPR

Article 20

  1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.
  2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

Who can deny the fact that Surah At-Taubah is propaganda for and advocacy of religious hatred and war?  It must be prohibited by law!  Unfortunately, it is Allah’s perfected, immutable word, incapable of reformation. Proscribing the practice & propagation of Islam is the only alternative.

CPPCG

Article 1

The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.

Article 2

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

Article 3

The following acts shall be punishable:

8:37. In order that Allâh may distinguish the wicked (disbelievers, polytheists and doers of evil deeds) from the good (believers of Islâmic Monotheism and doers of righteous deeds), and put the wicked (disbelievers, polytheists and doers of evil deeds) one on another, heap them together and cast them into Hell. Those! it is they who are the losers.

17:16. And when We decide to destroy a town (population), We (first) send a definite order (to obey Allâh and be righteous) to those among them [or We (first) increase in number those of its population] who are given the good things of this life. Then, they transgress therein, and thus the word (of torment) is justified against it (them). Then We destroy it with complete destruction.

17:17. And how many generations have We destroyed after Nûh (Noah)! And Sufficient is your Lord as an All-Knower and All-Beholder of the sins of His slaves.

Allah speaks of heaping disbelievers together and casting them into Hell in 8:37.  In 17:16, he brags about making complete destruction. In 17:17 he brags about destroying multiple generations. He is setting a pattern and precedent. Observe how he fleshes it out.

8:67. 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. You desire the good of this world (i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives), but Allâh desires (for you) the Hereafter. And Allâh is All-Mighty, All-Wise.

In 8:67, Allah sets great slaughter as the prerequisite for releasing captives for ransom, telling Moe that he must put slaughter ahead of profit. That tells us that Allah favors genocide.  This is confirmed in Surah Muhammad.

47:4. So, when you meet (in fight Jihâd in Allâh’s Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives). Thereafter (is the time) either for generosity (i.e. free them without ransom), or ransom (according to what benefits Islâm), until the war lays down its burden. Thus [you are ordered by Allâh to continue in carrying out Jihâd against the disbelievers till they embrace Islâm (i.e. are saved from the punishment in the Hell-fire) or at least come under your protection], but if it had been Allâh’s Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allâh, He will never let their deeds be lost,

“Till when you have killed and wounded many of them” confirms Allah’s quest for genocide. Moe besieged the Banu Qurayzah until they surrendered. What he did after they surrendered serves to confirm the message of 8:67 & 47:4.

Sahih Volume 4, Book 52, Number 280:

Narrated Abu Sa’id Al-Khudri:

When the tribe of Bani Quraiza was ready to accept Sad’s judgment, Allah’s Apostle sent for Sad who was near to him. Sad came, riding a donkey and when he came near, Allah’s Apostle said (to the Ansar), “Stand up for your leader.” Then Sad came and sat beside Allah’s Apostle who said to him. “These people are ready to accept your judgment.” Sad said, “I give the judgment that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as prisoners.” The Prophet then remarked, “O Sad! You have judged amongst them with (or similar to) the judgment of the King Allah.”  [For more complete detail, refer to 5.59.448]

Moe arbitrarily slaughtered  about 700 prisoners of war.  What he did next should make your blood boil with outrage.

Abu Dawud Book 38, Number 4390:
Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi:
I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.

First he decapitated the men, and cast them into a trench, then he did the same to their adolescent sons. Allah wants genocide and he gets it. Islam’s practice of genocide, mandated by Allah, is obviously not in conformity with the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

The Banu Qurayzah, Armenian, Assyrian  and Hindu genocides demonstrate a pattern of continuing crime against humanity. Islamic prophecy projects it far into the future:  to the end of the world. The following hadith is one of the clearest among several with similar content.

Abu Dawud Book 37, Number 4310:

Narrated Abu Hurayrah:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: There is no prophet between me and him, that is, Jesus (peace_be_upon_him). He will descent (to the earth). When you see him, recognise him: a man of medium height, reddish fair, wearing two light yellow garments, looking as if drops were falling down from his head though it will not be wet. He will fight the people for the cause of Islam. He will break the cross, kill swine, and abolish jizyah. Allah will perish all religions except Islam. He will destroy the Antichrist and will live on the earth for forty years and then he will die. The Muslims will pray over him.

This saying, distilled to its essence, means that Jesus will return to make genocidal war upon the remaining remnant of Jews & Christians, destroying both populations. Besides being blasphemous, it is a token of Islam’s genocidal intent.

Confirmation of Islam’s intention is found in Ibn Kathir’s Tafsir of  7:167.

[]In the future, the Jews will support the Dajjal (False Messiah); and the Muslims, along with `Isa, son of Mary, will kill the Jews. This will occur just before the end of this world.[] Eternal Humiliation is Placed on the Jews

The violation of Article 1, 2.1 and 3.1 is obvious. Likewise, violation of  3.3 is easy to demonstrate by quoting one popular hadith.

Sahih Muslim Book 041, Number 6985:
Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.

That hadith tells Muslims that they can not obtain admission to Paradise and enjoy their rivers of wine and 72 houris until they exterminate the Jews.

ICERD, ICCPR & CPPCG condemn Islam and require its proscription by law. Who will enforce those international human rights covenants?  Do you have the courage and conviction to demand that the World Court enforce international law against Islam?  For the sake of justice, sign the International Qur’an Petition and send it to everyone you can hope to influence with an exhortation to sign and forward it.

November 28, 2009 Posted by | Political Correctness, United Nations | , , , , | Leave a comment

U.S.A. vs Durban Declaration


A press release distributed by Press Zoom  appears to be taken from the records of the Third Committee, describing the debate and voting on several resolutions before the committee.

Those resolutions included the five-part draft text on global efforts for the total elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and the comprehensive implementation of and follow-up to the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action ( document A/C.3/64/L.54/Rev.1 ), which was introduced by the representative of Sudan, on behalf of the Group of 77 and China.

32. Calls upon all States, in accordance with the commitments undertaken in paragraph 147 of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action,1 to take all necessary measures to combat incitement to violence motivated by racial hatred,
including through the misuse of print, audio-visual and electronic media and new communication technologies
, and, in collaboration with service providers, to promote the use of such technologies, including the Internet to contribute to the fight against racism, in conformity with international standards of freedom of expression and taking all necessary measures to guarantee that right;

33. Encourages all States to include in their educational curricula and social programmes at all levels, as appropriate, knowledge of and tolerance and respect for all cultures, civilizations, religions, peoples and countries, as well as information on the follow-up to and implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action; [Emphasis added.]

Paragraph 32 quoted above is aimed directly at all criticism of Islam.  Its practical implementation is best illustrated by the words of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.

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.” [Emphasis added for clarity.]

The man chiefly responsible for enforcing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights asserts that there is no right to tell the truth about Islam. Fitna is not hate speech nor is it incitement; it accurately depicts Islamic hate speech and incitement.  The pending  trial of Geert Wilders on charges of hate speech is a prime example of  the violation of freedom of expression intended by the sponsors of this resolution.

Paragraph 33 encourages turning our schools into instruments  of propaganda & indoctrination, bordering on proselytizing.  It is impossible for an informed and rational person to tolerate or respect Islam because Islam is supremely intolerant and denies our rights and dignity in addition to declaring perpetual war against us.

Speaking in explanation of vote before the vote, the representative of the United States said his country was deeply committed to fighting racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance at home and abroad.  Its founding commitment to the principle that all people were created equal was manifested in its own legislation and its work around the world.  Among other things, the United States had, in October, presented an action plan during the meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee on the elaboration of complementary standards. [Emphasis added for clarity.]

The bold faced clause is composed of three code phrases for ‘Islamophobia’.  The preliminary meeting to prepare for the Durban II Racism Conference redefined racism to include criticism of Islam.

Emphasizes the urgent need to address the scourges of anti-Semitism, Christianophobia, and Islamophobia as contemporary forms of racism as well as racial and violent movements based on racism and discriminatory ideas directed at African, Arab, Christian, Jewish, Muslim and other communities; [Emphasis added for clarity, spelling original.]

Obamanation is “deeply committed to fighting” criticism of Islam. Their whining about freedom of expression is a smoke screen to cover their actual intent: to silence all criticism of Islam and the  regime’s Socialist agenda.


He said the United States had been unable to support the Durban Review Conference because it supported the 2001 World Conference, in toto.  The United States was deeply concerned about hateful speech, but did not agree that the best way to combat such speech was by its prohibition.  Rather, the United States believed an effective approach was based on three key elements, including robust legal protections against hate crimes, outreach to religious groups and vigorous defence of freedom of expression.  It regretted having to vote “no” on this text and looked forward to working together with the international community.  It remained deeply committed to ongoing, thoughtful dialogue on combating racism and racial discrimination.
[Emphasis added for clarity, spelling original.]

“Hateful speech” is code for any negative expression about Islam, including  Fitna: and the Danish Cartoons. Notice that the regime is concerned about the outcome: silencing all criticism, they seek an  “effective approach”, a method that will result in silence.

“Hate crimes”: if any expression should be criminalized, that is the one. Assaulting, killing or harassing  anyone is a crime, regardless of the victim’s identity, religion, gender, etc. There is no group of persons more deserving of protection than any other.

“Outreach to religious groups” is  code for pandering to Islam, submitting to its outrageous demands. Islam’s most outrageous demand is that we submit and become Muslims.  We might as well be bitten by Dracula and become vampires.  Islamic law forbids any and all negative expression about Allah, Moe, the Qur’an & the laws  they issued.  If you doubt this, open Reliance of the Traveller to O8.7 and read the list of acts which entail leaving Islam, the penalty for which is death (O8.2).  For the law’s applicability to non-Muslims, see  O11.10(5).

Far from being a saintly Prophet, Moe was a pedophile who married the six year old daughter of his best friend. He  solicited the murder of critics. He was guilty of  genocide; preaching and practicing it.

Far from being a  “great religion of peace”, Islam is a mercenary war cult, contrived for the purpose of enriching and empowering its founder by perpetuating war so that he could accrue the spoils.

Islam’s objective in demanding blasphemy laws & censorship is to disarm us in the war of ideas so that, in the words of George Washington,  “dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter”.

If you are a lover of liberty and the rights ensured by the Bill of Rights, then do your part to preserve them by signing and propagating these petitions. Send their links  to everyone you can hope to influence with an exhortation to sign and forward them.

 

November 28, 2009 Posted by | Political Correctness, United Nations | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

   

%d bloggers like this: