Freedom Ain’t Free & Take Our Country Back

VICTORY Is Not Defeat

OIC Abandons UN Push for Blasphemy Laws: In A Pig’s Anus!


 

Atlas Shrugs is claiming victory.  [Emphasis added.]

The
OIC has relentlessly pursued resolutions on restrictions on free speech
for decades. So their caving on this is astounding. This is a testament
to the work of vocal counter-jihadists in the West. When people began
to understand that it was not about “insulting” or “offensive” speech
but really about imposing the blasphemy laws under the sharia,
freedom-loving peoples were not having it. Not. at. all. I believe the
ummah will continue to agitate for free speech restrictions in the
streets and in smoky rooms behind closed doors of the EU and other
world bodies. And we see the media and political hacks already
self-enforcing the sharia without these proposed resolutions. But even so, this is a major
victory
. Savor it.

And
let the educating begin!

Freedom House welcomes the OIC’s decision to
abandon the push for UN resolutions condemning defamation of
Islam.

Freedom
House welcomes several recent statements by representatives of the
Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) affirming that the group will no
longer support the problematic concept of “
defamation
of religions
despite growing pressure
from some Muslim countries to pursue a global ban on blasphemy or
religious insult.

Human Rights First is on the same bandwagon.

Human
Rights First today welcomed the statement by Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu,
secretary-general of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC),
affirming the 57-member organization will not seek a global ban on
blasphemy or defaming religion through the United Nations
.

 

Skatta!

The claim of abandonment of pursuing the defamation
meme at the UN is lower than camel dung in the desert!  The
defamation meme, international blasphemy laws and promoting them
through the United Nations have not been abandoned; they continue on a
parallel track, below the radar.

So, they won’t push for new UN. resolutions;
big deal.  They are pushing for a binding protocol to ICERD which
will inject Islamic blasphemy law into an international human rights
covenant, making it enforceable in court.  An ad hoc committee of
the Human Rights Council meets for two ten day sessions each year to
code the protocol.  Once that protocol is signed and ratified, you
can kiss the free speech clause goodbye forever.  All negative
commentary on Islam will be punishable by law.

For the benefit of those ignorant of the Ad Hoc
Committee on Elaboration of Complementary International Standards, I
have embedded a pdf file compiled from seven previous blog posts.
It is 80 pages long, with plenty of redundancy.  The most
important clauses have been highlighted to make it easier for you to
skim the documents for the important bits.

They bitched about the publication of The Prophet of Doom,
which accurately quotes Islam’s canon  to provide the context and
chronology lacking in the Qur’an.   They bitched about the
publication of Fitna, which accurately  exposes the cause
and effect relationship between the damnable doctrines enshrined in the
Qur’an & exemplified in the hadith with their consequences on the
street when kutbah at Jumah Salat rouses the rabble.  They bitched
about the Motoons which depict Moe as a terrorist.  He
said that he was  “made victorious by terror“, so he damn well was a
terrorist.  They demanded blockage of the publication of those
works and they demand the head of the creator of Innocence of Muslims, which accurately depicts Moe as a lecherous pedophile,
murderer, barbarian war lord and false prophet.   Ban
Ki-moon’s statement about Fitna, quoted in the pdf, tells us everything
we need to know about what they want to ban: everything that puts Islam
in a bad light.

Our freedom of speech is under attack, even though
the attackers appear to have withdrawn.  We need to defend our
liberty and a good offense is the best defense.  The International
Qur’an Petition has a three page pdf which documents Islam’s egregious
violation of ICERD, ICCPR & CPPCG, which require it to be
proscribed by law.  When you sign that petition, it sends emails
to Congress, including a link to that pdf document.

 


View this document on Scribd

October 21, 2012 Posted by | Freedom Of Speech, Islam, Political Correctness, United Nations | , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Innocence of Muslims Update: OIC Demands Blasphemy Law


Pakistan
addressed the General Assembly on behalf of the OIC.  They demand
international  imposition of Islamic blasphemy law. It is
necessary to highlight their AssWholliness
& hypocrisy; that is the mission of this blog post.  They are
bitching about Innocence of Musalims, Charlie Hebdo’s outrageous
cartoons and Qur’an burning.  Carefully examine the video and
answer these questions:

  1. What does the video say about Muhammad and the cult he founded?
  2. Is it true or false?
  3. Where is the hate they are bitching about?
  4. Where is the incitement they are bitching about?

http://www.eyeontheun.org/assets/attachments/documents/10570item_9_Pakistan_on_behalf_of_OIC.pdf

STATEMENT BY PAKISTAN ON BEHALF OF THE
OIC IN THE GENERAL

DEBATE UNDER AGENDA ITEM 9

Madam President,

I have the honour to make this statement on behalf of the OIC,

The OIC Group unequivocally condemns the recent production of a film in
the

United States called “The Innocence of Muslims” which tries to defame Islam and the

personality of the Holy Prophet Muhammad
(peace be upon Him). This film is a blatant

attempt to provoke religious
hatred
, discrimination
and intolerance
that has led to unfortunate

loss of life and damage to property. In this context, we also strongly
condemn the violence

that resulted in the deaths of a number of people including a US
diplomat.

We note that the Secretary
General of the United Nations, The High


Commissioner for Human Rights
and the President of the United States
have also expressed

their opposition to the film.

Incidents like this clearly demonstrate the urgent
need on the part of States to

introduce adequate protection against acts of hate crimes, hate speech,
discrimination,


intimidation and coercion
resulting from defamation and negative stereotyping of religions,


and incitement to religious
hatred, as well denigration of venerated personalities.

Over the past months, there have been a number of
examples of acts of

incitement to hatred.
These include despicable incidents involving the burning of the Holy

Quran, and the publication of
defamatory cartoons
. OIC countries have repeatedly called on

the Governments concerned to take action to avert these offensive actions but nothing
has

been done on the excuse that such action would be a violation of the freedom of expression.

The OIC underlines that the situation created by the malicious act affirms once
more the

urgency for all States to fully uphold their obligations under
international law”, in particular

articles 19 and 20 olf ICCPR and article 4 of the International

Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination

We disagree. These are not exercises in freedom of expression but deliberate  attempts


to discriminate, defame,
denigrate and vilify Muslims and their beliefs.
Such acts

constitute flagrant incitement
to violence and are therefore in contravention of ICCPR


Articles 19 and 20. It
is therefore abundantly clear that there exists an urgent need to
establish

an internationally acceptable
threshold between freedom of expression and incitement to


violence and hatred.

The OIC has
never advocated any prohibitions on freedom of expression
.
Our

emphasis has been on the need to examine the consequences of unchecked,
unbridled and

irresponsible statements and
actions
made by certain groups and individuals that deliberately

instigate and incite violence
on the basis of religion or belief.
This can include situations

involving religious minorities
or situations in which minorities react violently
either in their

home societies or in societies where their co-religionists are in a
majority.

None of.this is completely uncharted territory. For
instance, we are all aware of

the fact that laws exist in Europe and other countries which impose curbs on anti-Semetic

speech, holocaust denial or
racial slurs
. We need to acknowledge, once and for all, that

Islamophobia in
particular and discrimination on the basis of religion and belief are

contemporary forms of racism
and must be dealt with as such. Not to do so would be a
clear

example of double standards. Islamophobia has to be
treated in law and practice equal to the


treatment given to
anti-Semitism, especially in the legislations. –

We recall the general comment 11 of the Human Rights
Committee and

general comment of the Committee on Elimination of Racial
Discrimination which confirm.

that restricting the freedom of expression on issues relating to racial
discrimination applies

. also for incitement to religious hatred.

The OIC’s resolution on “Combating Intolerance,
Negative Stereotyping And

Stigmatization of; and Discrimination, Incitement to Violence, and
Violence against Persons

based on Religion or Belief” adopted by consensus at the 16th
session of the Human Rights

Council on 24 March 2011, was a concrete attempt: to address this very.
concern by bringing

all the key players on board. The consensus resolution was the -result
of a long and often,

difficult negotiation process.

The OIC welcomes the joint statement by the OIC
Secretary general, Arab

League Secretary general, African Union Commissioner for Peace and
Security and European

Union High Representative for foreign and Security policy in which they
shared the profound

respect for all religion and refuse to, allow religion to be used to
fuel provocation,

confrontation and extremism. They reiterated their strong commitment to
take further

measures and to work for an international consensus on tolerance and full respect of
religion
,       <<<

including on the basis of UN Human rights Council resolution 16/18.

At the heart of the resolution are a series of
practical steps to be taken by states

to combat the ever increasing instances of intolerance, negative stereo-typing,
stigmatization


and discrimination and violence
all over the world. This core issue has been approached in a

manner that is acceptable to
all
so that all stake-holders are bound by the commitments

contained in the text. The OIC believes that there is an urgent need to
take concrete steps

towards the implementation of the plan action contained in the
resolution to avoid the

occurrence of such condemnable
incidents in the future
. If this is not done, there is a very real

chance of a
breakdown of the delicate consensus on this issue as reflected in the
resolution


which would be
unfortunate for all of us.

The OIC remains ready to work with its international
partners at the Human

Rights Council in Geneva, the UN General Assembly in New York to
address and resolve

these critical issues in order to better protect and promote
human rights as well as peace and .


security within our
respective societies.

We also call upon the High Commissioner and her
Office to assist this . important effort.

I thank you.

 

tries to defame

If you were trying to defame someone with a video,
would you derive its dialogue from his original hagiographic biography
and the most authentic oral traditions from his companions?  In
Western legal tradition, defamation involves malicious falsehood.
Exactly what is false about the video’s depiction of Moe?

deliberate provocation

What does the video have to do with religious
hatred, discrimination and intolerance?  It illustrated the hatred
of Muslims who, when they can do it with impunity, murder Christians
and destroy their property.  What is provocative about that? Must
the news media be prevented from reporting on religiously motivated
violence in Africa. Arabia and Asia because it might be
provocative?  What was Moe’s attitude toward infidels? Was it
accurately depicted in the video? What is provocative about that?

unfortunate loss of life

How did the video lead to loss of life? How many of
the rioters saw the video? The riots were deliberately stirred up by
mass media and rabid rants in the mosques. Fortune had nothing to do
with murder and destruction, they are intended effects of the damnable
doctrines of Islam.

What did Christians destroy and whom did they kill
over “Piss Christ” and “The Holy Virgin Mary”?  What is the
difference between Christians and Muslims or their respective doctrines
that explains the widely divergent reactions to disturbing
images?  What did Jesus do?  What did Moe do?  Whom do
Muslims emulate?  Do the murders of Kab Ashraf, Asma Bint Marwan
and Um Qirfa ring a bell?

appeal to authority

The listed authority figures are full of fecal
matter so that it comes out their mouths, which I pointed out in
several blog posts. It ain’t who you know, it is what you know. I know
that the conceptual content of the video is true according to Islam’s
canon.  I know that there is no rational basis for condemning the
video.  I know that the listed authority figures are scared
witless of Islam and seek to appease Muslims.  I do not accept
them as an argument for censorship.

hate crimes, hate speech…

Hate crimes and hate speech do not flow from
defamation or negative stereotyping, they flow from hate. The riots in
Egypt and murders in Bengazi are the fruit of wala wal bara:
“love and hate for the sake of Allah”. Those are hate crimes, for which
the criminals constantly seek pretexts. That is low intensity warfare,
a doctrine borrowed from the Soviets and their ‘non aligned’ clients.

Moe hated Jews and Christians because they perceived
the fraudulent nature of the cult he contrived to ensnare them with
perverted and distorted stories from their scriptures and apocryphal
books. The first surah of the Qur’an reminds Allah why he should want
to burn us. Muslims recite it 17 times each day.  The second surah
says that we are cursed by Allah, angels and men.  The third tells
Muslims that they are the best of peoples raised up for mankind as they
drag us to Islam in chains.  It also tells Muslims that if they
attack us, we will do them no harm.

defamation

It ain’t defamatory unless it is false and
malicious.  Did the video defame Moe when it reported that he
thought he was demon possessed and tried to kill himself?  Before
answering, perhaps you should refer to the first book in Sahih Bukhari
and Ibn Sa’d’s  hadith collection.  Did the video defame Moe
when it depicted him as a pedophile?  Perhaps you should go to
your favorite hadith search engine and look up “six years old” before
answering that. Muttawir ahadith testify to Aisha’s age at marriage and
consummation, with one hadith giving her age as seven.

Did the video defame Moe when it depicted him as a
lecher?  Did he really divert Hafsa from the bedroom on her night
in order to tryst with her slave girl?  Dig into Volume 9 of the
Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, page 88 if memory
serves.   And the murder of Kinana & rape of his widow,
Safiya? True or false?  Look it up in Guillaume’s The Life of
Muhammad and Tabari’, if memory serves, its in Vol. 8.  And the
talking donkey?  Ishaq reveals that it was paid in tribute by an
Egyptian ruler, along with the slave girl and her sister.  The
part about the interview with the donkey is in the Encyclopedia of
Canonical Hadith.

And the command to wage war, killing the men and
enslaving their widows and orphans, is that true? If you read the
Qur’an, surahs 8, 9 & 33, you know the answer.

stereotyping

The video does not say anything about Muslims other
than Moe and his companions who are long since dead.  How does it
stereotype Muslims?  Moe defined and exemplified Islam.  33:21 tells Muslims if they want to meet Allah in
a positive way, they had better emulate Moe.  3:32
tells them to Obey Allah & Moe.  What Moe was, pious believers
are to the extent that they know his sunnah and are able to emulate
it.

If Moe channeled Satan instead of God, which he did,
then in stead of worshiping God, Muslims worship his adversary.
If Moe revealed situational scripture, which he did, then Muslims
follow a fraud: a false prophet.    When we expose the
truth about Allah & Moe, we expose Muslims as demon’s slaves and
members of a crime syndicate.

incitement to religious hatred

How does the video incite religious hatred?
And what is the foul if it did?  Should not an impious fraud which
has murdered millions and enslaves billions be hated?  Exposing
evil is not incitement.  Doing evil is incitement. The terrorism,
riots & murders,. not cartoons, books & videos cause us to hate
Islam.

denigration

Moe was venal, not venerable, Guillaume’s The
Life of Muhammad
and The Sealed Nectar
display the true character and works of Moe; should they be banned for
denigration of a venerable personality?

acts of incitement

Uttering & publishing Innocence of Muslims
is not an act of incitement, it is an act of education:: showing
viewers a fair sample what Moe was and what he did.  The Qur’an is
an insulting incitement; Allah told Moe to recite it in a low voice to
avoid stirring up the pagans.

(And offer your Salah neither aloud nor in a low voice,) Ibn `Abbas
said: “When he prayed with his Companions, he would recite Qur’an
loudly, and when the idolators heard that, they insulted the Qur’an,
and the One Who had revealed it and the one who had brought it. So
Allah said to His Prophet

What was Moe doing when he recited these ayat? How
does recitation of these verses and the rest of the 164
violent verses
comport with ICCPR
19 & 20 CPPCG
3 and ICERD
4?

1:6. Guide us to the Straight Way

1:7. The Way of those on whom You have bestowed Your Grace, not (the way) of those who earned
Your Anger (such as the Jews), nor of those who went astray (such as
the Christians). 

3:85. And whoever
seeks a religion other than Islâm, it will never
be accepted
of
him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.

3:110. You [true believers in Islâmic Monotheism,
and real followers of Prophet Muhammad  and his Sunnah (legal
ways, etc.)] are
the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind;
you enjoin
Al-Ma’rûf (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism and all that Islâm has ordained) and
forbid Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islâm has
forbidden), and you believe in Allâh. And had the people of the
Scripture (Jews and Christians) believed, it would have been better for
them; among them are some who have faith, but most of them are
Al-Fâsiqûn (disobedient to Allâh – and rebellious against Allâh’s
Command).

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
.

3:111. They will do you no
harm, barring a trifling annoyance
; and if they fight against
you, they will show you their backs, and they will not be helped.

3:112. Indignity is put over
them wherever they may be
, except when under a covenant (of
protection) from Allâh, and from men; they have drawn on themselves the
Wrath of Allâh, and destruction
is put over them
. This is because they disbelieved in
the Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.)
of Allâh and killed the Prophets without right. This is because they
disobeyed (Allâh) and used to transgress beyond bounds (in Allâh’s
disobedience, crimes and sins).

8:39. And 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
]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allâh), then
certainly, Allâh is All-Seer of what they do.

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.

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.

9:38. O you who believe! What is the matter with you, that
when you are asked to march forth in the Cause of Allâh (i.e. Jihâd)
you cling heavily to the earth?
Are you pleased with the life of
this world rather than the Hereafter? But little is the enjoyment of
the life of this world as compared with the Hereafter.

9:39. If
you march not forth, He will punish you with a painful torment

and will replace you by another people, and you cannot harm Him at all,
and Allâh is Able to do all things.

9:111. Verily, Allâh has purchased of the
believers their lives and their properties; for the price that theirs
shall be the Paradise. They fight in
Allâh’s Cause, so they kill (others) and are killed
. It is a
promise in truth which is binding on Him in the Taurât (Torah) and the
Injeel (Gospel) and the Qur’ân. And who is truer to his covenant than
Allâh? Then rejoice in the bargain which you have concluded. That is
the supreme success .

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

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).

61:10. O You who believe! Shall I guide you to a commerce that
will save you from a painful torment.

61:11.  That you believe in Allâh and His Messenger (Muhammad ),
and that
you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allâh with your wealth and
your lives
, that will be better for you, if you but know!

61:12. (If you do so) He will forgive
you your sins, and admit you into Gardens
under which rivers
flow, and pleasant dwelling in Gardens of ‘Adn ­ Eternity [‘Adn (Edn)
Paradise], that is indeed the great success.

offensive actions

Publishing videos, cartoons and books along with
burning the Qur’an are symbolic actions which do no objective
harm.  Burning churches, murdering Christians, bombing mass
transit and flying hijacked aircraft into office buildings are
offensive actions which incite us to utter and publish the truth about
Islam.

freedom of expression.

Amendment I

Congress
shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging
the freedom of speech, or of the press
; or the right of
the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a
redress of grievances.

 

George Washington:

If the freedom of speech is taken away
then dumb and silent we may be
led, like sheep to the slaughter.

Since Islam declared and is prosecuting war upon us
it is necessary that we be able to discuss it with honesty, accuracy
and clarity.  The War College and West Point need to be free to
give full and honest instruction in the doctrines and laws of Islam in
the training of our officer corps.  Censorship and political
correctness must be rolled back and stamped out!

Imposition of Islamic blasphemy law would make
Thomas Jefferson a criminal for uttering & publishing his report to
Congress.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Barbary_War

The
ambassador answered us that [the right] was founded on the Laws of the
Prophet (Mohammed), that it was written in their Koran, that all
nations who should not have answered their authority were sinners, that
it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could
be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and
that every Mussulman (or Muslim) who should be slain in battle was sure
to go to heaven.

malicious act

Publishing Innocence of Muslims
is not a malicious act, it simply makes available, for those who wish
to view it, an accurate depiction of a segment of the Life of
Moe.  Rousing the rabble to attack our Embassy & Consulate and
murder our Ambassador and staff were malicious acts.

Enforcement of human rights covenants

is indeed an urgent matter.  The International
Criminal Court must open a case condemning Islam for incitement to war,
racial supremacism and incitement to genocide.  Because Islam
perpetrated the Hindu, Assyrian & Armenian genocides and seeks to
commit genocide against Jews, it must be condemned and proscribed by
law.

OIC never advocated

prohibition of free expression; never?  You demanded that Holland
block release of Fitna and
Wilders’ book. You demanded that Denmark prosecute the publisher of the
Motoons.
You promoted the passage of UN resolutions condemning and demanding the
criminalization of criticism of Islam and you demand persecution of the
creator of Innocence
of Muslims
. But you never advocated abridgment of the right of
free speech: Camelshit!

consequences

Cartoons, videos, books and statements do not have
consequences. The barbarian behavior of Muslim mobs is a consequence of
the rabid ranting of Imams at Jumah Salat, not anything we do.
Muslims exploit anything we say or do as a pretext for barbarism but
pretext is not causation, it is rationalization. Ladies and
gentlemen:  Get a God blessed clue for Chrissake!!! I present for
your edification a sentence of Shari’ah from Hedaya, the code of the
Hanifi school of fiqh.

The destruction of the sword  is
incurred by infidels, although they be not the first aggressors, as
appears from various passages in the  sacred writings which are
generally received this effect. [
http://www.archive.org/stream/hedaysorguide00hamigoog#page/n154/mode/1up]

minorities react violently

Did Copts burn mosques when Piss Christ and The Holy Virgin Mary
were put on display as ‘art’?  When  Muslims ‘react
violently’, they exemplify the damnable doctrines of Islam and their
own AssWholliness, which alone are the
causes of their violence.

Curbs

on antisemitism & holocaust denial exemplify European stateism, the
USA does not emulate them because of our First Amendment. We allow free
and open debate, secure in the belief that truth will triumph in a
level venue.  Those restrictions on European free speech  do
not serve as a positive model for imposition of Islam’s blaspemy
law.  Islam seeks to prohibit all criticism of Allah, Moe and
their damned war cult because they are indefensible; our factual
evidence and logic can not be refuted. Islam can not prevail in free
debate, so it must silence all critics by force just as Moe
commissioned the assassinations of his critics.

racism

What race is Islam?  Its founder and first
adherents were Arabs but it has conquered and forcibly converted
Africans, Asians and Caucasians.  The existence of both Black and
White Muslims  and the ability to become Muslim without changing
one’s skin pigment or physiognomy serve to devastate the accusation of
racism in thinking minds.  Hurling that epithet is the  last
refuge of  scurrilous politicians and AssWholes.

Islamophobia

Phobia is an irrational fear. After the Accursed
Abomination 11 years ago, we are fully aware of the fact that Islam is
a worthy object of fear, loathing and execration, death & damnation
be upon it! Islam inculcates hatred and incites genocidal
violence.  Hatred of Islam is well founded and rational, not
irrational.

legislation

https://snooper.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/defamation-of-religions-background-info/
contains links to the documents you should read to get a good grip on
the issue of the legislation demanded by the OIC.

https://snooper.wordpress.com/2011/12/21/big-lie-un-drops-call-to-outlaw-defamation-of-religions/
tackles the issue of Res 16/18 in detail.

https://snooper.wordpress.com/2012/09/20/ad-hoc-cmte-war-on-free-speech/

https://snooper.wordpress.com/2010/03/20/ad-hoc-committee-new-resolutions/
This pair of blog posts will acquaint you with a parallel process
running below the radar of mass media.  The Ad Hoc Committee on
Elaboration of Complementary Standards meets for ten days each spring
and fall for the purpose of coding Islam’s blasphemy laws into a
binding protocol to ICERD.  If they succeed and the President
signs the damn thing, kiss the First Amendment  goodbye
forever.  The Iranian proposal and the non paper paper are
essential to understanding what they propose to do.

tolerance & respect

Tolerance is a two way street. Islam is intolerant.
Go back and re-read 3:85 and the context of 3:110. That is
intolerance, not tolerance.  How in Hell can anyone who declares
perpetual war against Jews & Christians
lecture us about
tolerance?  Only by supreme AssWholliness!

Respect must be earned; Islam has not earned it and
is no more respectable than it is tolerable.  I can not tolerate
propagation of the idea that my blood and property are not sacred; that I have
no human rights and its open season.  I can not tolerate that
which declares and war against me.

I can not respect a G’d’d demon who demands genocide
as the price of admission to his Celestial Bordello. I can not respect a pederast
who claimed divine sanction for his marriage to his
best friend’s six year old daughter.  I can not respect a
false prophet who attributed to his idol what his idol did not say, asserting divine sanction for his sexual proclivities.

promote peace and security

The highlighted clause in this sentence fragment is
a thinly veiled threat:  threatening violence if we do not submit
to censorship. By God, I will never submit!!!

…to
address and resolve these critical issues in order to better protect and promote
human rights as well as peace and .


security within our
respective societies.

Peace and
security can only be promoted by making Islam extinct.

September 28, 2012 Posted by | Ahadith, GWOT, Islam, Political Correctness, United Nations | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Racism and Related Intolerance: Free Speech Endangered!


http://www.eyeontheun.org/assets/attachments/documents/10563from_rhetoric….pdf

21” SESSION OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 9

211 … From rhetoric to reality: a global call for concrete action
against racism, racial
discrimination, xenophobia and related
intolerance

racism

 

related intolerance

The
following quote is from Preliminary document of the African Regional
Conference Preparatory to the Durban Review Conference

[Emphasis added.]

4.  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;

These terms, when used in UN resolutions, imply Islamophobia.
They are used to condemn and criminalize all criticism of Islam, Allah,
Moe and their doctrines & practices.

Alarmed by the use of
the internet and
social media
by extremist
groups
and individuals_     _

to disseminate racist ideas
and propagate racism, racial
discrimination, xenophobia and


related intolerance,
(NEW, Paragraph 12 of Report AIHRCl20138)

 

extremist groups

This is a code phrase for EDL, Velams Belang,
Freedom Party, Tea Party, etc. It is a smear: an attempt to link
defenders of liberty with Nazism & Fascism.

Deploring the use of the print,
audio-visual and electronic media including the Internet,

and any other means to incite
acts of national, racial or religious violence
, xenophobia or

related intolerance and
discrimination against any
religion
, as well as the targeting of

religious symbols and venerated
persons
(AIHRCIResolution 10122, updated)

 

incite acts of religious violence

Religious violence is incited in the Qur’an (3:151, 8:12, 39, 57, 59, 60, 65, 67, 9:5, 29, 111, 120, 123, 47:4, 49:15 & 61:10), in hadith (Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387, 4.52.177, Sunan Abu Dawud 14.2635, 23.3455 & 14.2497), and Shari’ah (Reliance of the Traveller:
O9.0-9, Hedaya Vol. 2, pg 140-230). Muslims riot because of rabid kutbah in
the mosques and mass media, not because of cartoons such as the Motoons or videos such as Fitna
& Innocence
of Muslims
.  Those videos do not incite, they expose
incitement.

any religion

Islam! That is all the OIC and their dhimmis are
interested in.

religious symbols

The Qur’an.

venerated persons

Allah & Moe.

4. Recalls that preventing and
combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and

related intolerance is a primary responsibility of States, and in this
regard,

recommends:

(a) That States should develop and implement national action plans to combat

racism and racial
discrimination, and to promote diversity, equality, equity,

social justice, equality of opportunity and participation of all. These
plans

should aim at creating conditions for all to participate effectively in
decisionmaking

and realize civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights in
all

spheres of life on the basis of non-discrimination, (NEW, based on
paragraphs

50, 51 & 56 (a) of Report AIHRC120133)

action plans to combat racism

They are demanding national legislation to
criminalize criticism of Islam and prohibit “profiling”.

6. Reiterates, particularly
considering contemporary challenges in this area, the primacy      

of elaborating additional
protocols to the International Convention on the Elimination


of All ~orms-of Racial
~iscrimination
, filling both procedural and substantive gaps

with a view to maximum protection, adequate remedies and combating
impunity for

no-recurrence.(NEW)

protocols to ICERD

There is an Ad Hoc Committee for this purpose, which
meets again in May of 2013. Its deliberations have been stalled on both
procedural and substantive issues.  Its mission is to code binding
protocols which, when signed, will be legally binding and
enforcible.

substantive gaps

This is a code phrase for the lack of provisions
criminalizing criticism of Islam.  They want the guts of the old
defamation resolutions injected into ICERD so that they can be enforced
in court.

September 20, 2012 Posted by | Islam, Political Correctness, United Nations | , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

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

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

Petition of Ignorance


Muslim Thought Re-published  Dr. Hasan Yahya’s “Petition of Ignorance: Banning of Islam” dated  02/18/09.

Dr. Yahya’s critique derisively focuses on form,  but his original post was mis formated, and several cross posts which I have seen, including the present case, copy that mis format, making them difficult to read.  To make matters worse, the article has no indentations or double spacing, it is one large block of text.  These brilliant, wise, all knowing scholars don’t know how to use html or make their writing readable.

The article criticized the Ban Islam Petition, which has, at the time of this writing, 889 signatures. Since the petition does not supply evidence  to support the charges it makes, its appeal is to people who are already familiar with the evil doctrines and practices of Islam.

I have extracted selected statements from Dr.Yahya’s article, placing them in the outer level of an unordered list, with my own comments and evidence in deeper levels of the list. .

  • [H]e brings the honorable Prophet of Islam, which Bernard Shaw, the Irish philosopher described as the top of 100 historical personalities in history, found on earth as a great leader.
  • The petition wanted to bring Muhammad (SAAS) the Prophet of Islam like Omar al-Bashir of Sudan, and Hitler for the Holocoust, and the Butcher of Bosnian Muslims of Checkoslovakia. Which I believe is a completely ignorant and unfounded claim.[…]
    • Moe died in 632, he is beyond the reach of  the World Court. His ‘crimes’ were cited in the petition because they are sunna, exemplary acts to be emulated by Muslims in all places, at all times.  It is Islam, not Moe in the dock, Dr.Yahya resorts to reductio ad absurdum, suggesting that petitions against David and Solomon would be parallels to the petition against Islam.  He ignores the fact that Judaism & Christianity underwent reformations while Islam remains and will always remain fixated in the 7th century.
  • In this petition there is comment number: 16, which shows Sir Winston Churchill stated in 1899, that Muslims utilize cruel rules and practices early in his life when he was ignorant in politics and of Islam as a great religion. By generalizing his view for all Muslims. […]
    • Churchill  served as a British Army officer & war correspondent in Somalia & India where he had ample opportunity for exposure to Islam.
    • Not withstanding the incomplete sentence, Churchill wrote about Islam, not Muslims. The cited comment does not appear at the specified location in the petition signatures, but may be seen in  a blog comment.
  • Then you have comment number: 184, for William S. Arnott, Ph.D who strongly encourages such petitions.
    My comment: He has a Ph.D, to say the man is an authority, in fact the carrier of this Ph.D wrote: “Their [the Muslims] deterministic religion is not for the freedom of anyone but is for control of everyone.” I think the use of “anyone,” and “everyone” over generalizes in a situation when specificality is needed rendering his opinion out of the scientific circle by any quantitative or qualitative measurement.

    • With a little research, I discovered that Dr. Arnott is a retired psychologist, with degrees appropriate to his occupation. His critic has degrees in Educational Psychology & Sociology. How does Dr. Yahya have any more credibility than Dr. Arnott?
  • In support of this position the petitioner cites comments from a range of contributors listed by numbers as follows: 16, 184, 536, 518, 82, 653, 655, 654, and 659. Comment number 536, which he breached as an innocent adolescent shool boy that “the muslims are a victim of islam. make no mistake about that.” And calls to rescue “the helpless victims of islam” and help them to be “a free people” He then proceeds to call on Saudi Arabia to change its ways. This stikes me as somewhat odd. Someone as learned as the petioner would claim to be would undoubtly understand that Saudi Arabia is a small portion of the Muslim world, which includes over 1.5 Billion followers. Its population according to almanac 2007, was 27 million. That is less than 2% of the overall Muslim population worldwide. Thanks for the advice, I am sure Saudi Arabia appreciates it.
    • The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia contains the focal point of Islam: the Kaaba, in the Grand Mosque in Mecca. The K.S.A. finances the spread of fundamentalist Islam all over the globe.
  • Comment 518, the comment is written in French. Unfortunately, I do not speak French. I did, however, recognize some catalystic words. Words such as; Islam, Cathiliques, genocide, massacre, religions, Bouddiste, hindu, religion impose, and psychologiques, and sects, among others. My ethical resolve does not allow me to comment on something that I do not fully understand. I only wish the petitioner had such ethical standards.
    • Without reading the comment, Dr. Yahya concludes that the commenter has low ethical standards, writing about a subject he does not comprehend. Dr. Yahya’s hypocrisy is obvious.
      • L’Islam appelle à l’esclavage des musulmanes envers les musulmans, des Juifs et des Catholiques. Cette religion appelle au génocide par le massacre en masse des athés et des autres religions qui ne sont pas “du livre” (bouddiste, hindou, etc). cette religion impose une loi (la charia) qui est épouvantable pour l’humanité (ex la lapidation des femmes, l’esclavage sexuel des non musulmanes, etc). Cette religion utilise des outils de manipulations psychologiques que l’on retrouve dans les sectes.
      • Google Translation:
        • Islam calls for the enslavement of Muslims against Muslims, Jews and Catholics. This religion calls for genocide by the mass slaughter of atheists and other religions are not “book” (Buddhists, Hindu, etc.). that religion imposes a law (Sharia), which is terrible for humanity (eg stoning of women, sexual slavery of non-Muslim, etc.). This religion uses psychological manipulation tools found in sects.
    • Upon examination of the translated comment, I find therein nothing contrary to the truth; it is an accurate description of Islam.
  • Comment 655. a comment from someone; s/he says: “The use of religion to torture, kill, malign, coerce and condone maltreatment of any living creature is heinous.” I agree so far. But on this statement I disagree. s/he said: “Islam does all of these things.” According to whom? This is your basic stereotypical mentality and wreaks of ignorance. Many of the comments are like this, one persons account or opinion but completely unsubstantiated and lacking in real value in understanding.
  • Comment 654. says:”In the interest of world peace ban islam.” S/he agrees on false claim or petition to ban Islam. I wonder to myself as I am reading this comment: what level of bigotry and racist view are these? I am appalled as a sociologist to see such free acceptance of illogical statements in a petition that is to be taken seriously. This comment is written by a blind follower. You could say anything and the “yes, count me in” mentality kicks in. I could probably go around and gets quotes from random people saying that they hate football. That doesn’t mean I will go forward with a petition to ban football.
  • Finally, the sponsor of the petition, his name is Lorenzo Bouchard, and his email, is labouchard@shaw.ca
    A final comment is what about the other numbers of comments which may be redicule the petition or call for peace and harmony in America in logical sense From the 659 or may be more comments? Just a question. Americans are not fools to accept such a racist and discriminative petition. Forty years ago, blacks compared with whites were less intillegent and some racist scientist like the one with Ph.D, the petitioner brought, claimed that in the 1980s, Today, Obama proved that blacks are not less than any person on earth if they have the chance and opportunity. For this I proudly say, long live America. And I feel sorry for this ill-guided petition to incite hatred in a healthy society like the USA.

    • What is the relevance of the name and contact information of the author of the petition?  Let the petition stand  or fall on its intrinsic merit.
    • Dr. Yahya arbitrarily dismissis comments in support of the petition. Why should we blindly accept criticism of it?
    • The petition is not racist; Islam is a war cult, not a race. Islam is not limited to Arabia, Arabs conquered North Africa, nearly half of Asia and much of Southern & Eastern Europe. It has enslaved people of several races.  Rejecting a pseudo religion which commands its votaries to conquer the world, performing acts of terrorism & genocide in the process is not evil, it is a wise decision based on verifiable facts and sound judgment.

A newer petition, urges the World Court to grant injunctive relief against Islam.It presents evidence of Islam’s static violation of international human rights conventions. It is carefully formatted and its evidence is linked to source documents for easy verification & contextual exploration. The International Qur’an Petition, published August 18, has 116 signatures at present.

Muslims, seeking to impose their blasphemy laws onto the entire world, assert that all criticism of islam is racism and hate speech, intended to incite violence against Muslims.   Those assertions are intended to shut off debate, precluding all questioning of Islam’s bona fides.  That is the purpose of the Defamation of Religions resolution being debated by the Third Committee and a proposal to add a protocol to ICERD,  being written by the Ad Hoc Committee for the Elaboration of Complementary Standards.

The resolution and the protocol seek to use international human rights law against us, rendering us defenseless in the ideological war which Islam is waging against our liberties.  The International Qur’an Petition is our way of turning the tables on Islam, using their tactic against them. Islam’s canon of scripture, tradition & jurisprudence contravenes ICERD, ICCPR & CPPCG.  The petition offers proof of that fact. If the international human rights covenants are to have any meaning and effect, Islam must be proscribed by law.

I am asking you to read the International Qur’an Petition and evaluate the evidence for yourself. If you agree that Islam must be proscribed, sign the petition and send it to everyone you can hope to influence with an exhortation to sign and forward it. You can copy the petition’s text and paste it into an email or download it in the form of a 14kb pdf file for use as an email attachment.

Proscribe Islam Petition Rough Draft is a71kb pdf file containing the full quotes of the the evidence of Islam’s guilt. .Islam vs Human Rights 64kb chm file compiled from 7 blog posts exposing Islam’s static violations of ICCPR.

The fact, revealed by the codified oral traditions of Moe’s companions, is that Islam’s mission is mercenary, its method is martial and its founder was a lecher, pedophile and soborner of murder.   That is truth, not hate speech. That is condemnation of Islam, not an exhortation to assault or murder Muslims.

The Danish Cartoons depict Moe as a terrorist. They  exaggerate; Moe never possessed a bomb because he died before the invention of explosives. But he was, by his own admission, a terrorist.  The cartoons do not suggest attacks against Muslims. The violence was spawned by the preaching of radical clerics, not by the cartoons. Fitna, the short video documentary by Geert Wilders, illustrates that fact most effectively. It shows Allah’s commands and the cleric’s raving along with the resultant rioting. Fitna is neither hate speech nor incitement, it is an expose of Islam’s hate speech and incitement to violence.

November 17, 2009 Posted by | Political Correctness | , , , , | Leave a comment

UNHRC US Delegation Reveals Treachery


The  U.S. Delegation to the UNHRC  uttered and published a statement on a human rights report. That statement exposes the  Obama administration’s treason to scrutiny; I can not resist.  I have therefore selected excerpts for dissection. [Emphasis added.]

Report of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance

http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/12session/A-HRC-12-38_E.pdf

http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/publisher,UNGA,,,4ab0a9180,0.html

http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N08/493/42/PDF/N0849342.pdf?OpenElement

The Human Rights Council – 12th session
Statement by the Delegation of the United States of America
Delivered by Sarah Cleveland
Geneva, 30 September 2009

While we do not support the concept of “defamation of religions” for reasons well known to this Council, my government is strongly committed to religious freedom and has condemned the use of negative and derogatory stereotypes and discrimination and/or discriminatory policies. We recognize that such stereotyping and discrimination affects individuals of all faiths and races, and express our strong condemnation of the types of such intolerance provided in the report.

It is good to read that the Obama administration does not support the concept of defamation of  Islam, but it would be better  if they would emphatically condemn it. The term “negative and derogatory stereotypes” raises a red flag.  Its implication: ‘all Muslims are evil’ its reality: Islam is evil. It is a veiled reference to Geert Wilders’ video Fitna and the infamous Danish Cartoons. Once that overly broad term is enshrined in law, it will be used to criminalize all criticism of Islam.

As noted in our response to the High Commissioner on the issue of defamation of religion, the United States believes the best way for governments to address the issues underlying intolerance is to develop effective legal regimes to address acts of discrimination and bias-inspired crime; to condemn hateful speech and proactively reach out to all religious communities, especially minority groups. We strive to do this while vigorously defending the freedom of religion and freedom of expression.

Crime is crime, regardless of the identity of the victim. Rape or robbery, assault or murder, the effect is the same whether the victims is straight or queer, Atheist or Muslim and ought to carry equal penalty dependent on the offense, not the victim.

Condemning hateful speech raises the issue of definition. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon declared Fitna and the Danish Cartoons to be hate speech, following the lead of the OIC. From their viewpoint, any truthful criticism of Islam is hateful speech.  Their tactical objective is to criminalize all criticism of Islam so that we will be completely disarmed in the war of ideas.  The Obama administration is siding with the enemy, against the First Amendment right of free expression.

The advocacy of proactively reaching out to all religious communities … especially minority groups points out significant hypocrisy.

  • condemned the use of negative and derogatory stereotypes and discrimination
  • proactively reach out to all religious communities, especially minority groups

The inconsistency should be immediately obvious to everyone. So should the second incidence of hypocrisy  in that paragraph.

  • condemn hateful speech
  • while vigorously defending … freedom of expression

When the cartoonists pointed out the fact that Muhammad was a terrorist,  their  art was condemned as hateful speech. The OIC and its factotums in  the UN  Expresses deep concern in this respect that Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism; I refuted that assertion in Freedom of Opinion and Expression by revealing the source of the association. That is truth, not hate speech. President Obama would condemn it.

Racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance are serious challenges facing the international community and the United States believes they must be examined methodically and deliberately. The United States submits that this process of self-examination and action by the international community begin with greater opportunities to exchange views and address empirical data and practice on matters related to racial, ethnic, and religious diversity, discrimination, and intolerance – notably through discussions in the Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards – so as to broaden our common understanding of these important issues and provide a solid foundation for a broad-based consensus for further actions and initiatives.

You think that racism refers to irrational hatred of people whose skin color is different. That is not what the word means to the OIC and UN. To them,  it  means criticism of and enmity to Islam.

4.  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;

Since the publication of the Durban II Preliminary Document,  when you read racism in a UN document, you can translate it as Islamophobia. No word is safe in the Orwellian UN.  Related intolerance is a code phrase for the same concept. Islamophobia implies irrational fear and loathing. What is irrational about fear and loathing of a war cult which has murdered 270*106 people in the last 1386 years?

The Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards has an abstract name which contains no hint of its purpose. The committee is a subset of the UNHRC. Its purpose is to write a legally binding protocol to ICERD. The protocol will make criticism of Islam a criminal offense in international law.  The Obama administration just endorsed that damnable program of action which directly contravenes the First Amendment. The details are contained in a series of blog posts.

The various national submissions to the committee are contained in this pdf file: Outline for the Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards Consultations.  The Non-Paper Paper, which makes the objective crystal clear, is contained in this pdf file: http://www.eyeontheun.org/assets/attachments/documents/7750.pdf.

October 13, 2009 Posted by | Political Correctness, United Nations | , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Freedom of Opinion and Expression


At their October 2, 2009 meeting, the miserably misnamed United Nations Human Rights Council under agenda item 3:

PROMOTION AND PROTECTION OF ALL HUMAN RIGHTS, CIVIL,
POLITICAL, ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS,
INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO DEVELOPMENT

passed, without a vote, a draft resolution submitted jointly by Egypt and the United  States, entitled:  Freedom of opinion and expression.

If any resolution has ever been given a more Orwellian title, I am unaware of it. While superficially appearing to recognize and protect freedom of expression, in reality it threatens  that freedom. Eye on the UN has made the resolution available in the form of an eight page pdf file: A/HRC/12/L.l4/Rev.

Since the file was made from a scanned image, FreeOCR.net was used to make text available for quoting, which compelled the complete reconstruction of the document’s format. I have retained the original spelling. The resolution makes reference to two external documents:

The pattern of deception begins in the preamble. [Emphasis added.]

Deeply concerned that violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression continue to occur, including increased attacks directed against, and killings of, journalists and media workers, and stressing the need to ensure greater protection for all media professionals and for journalistic sources,

News agencies, human rights groups and decent people are concerned about assaults against and murder of journalists;  the repressive regimes who perpetrate those evil acts are not, theirs are crocodile tears. Egypt has a record of jailing and torturing bloggers.

Stressing the need to ensure that the invocation of national security, including counter-terrorism, is not used unjustifiably or arbitrarily to restrict the right to freedom of opinion and expression,

That appears to be a reference to the Patriot Act. I  am not aware of any offenses against freedom of expression being carried out under its provisions. Muslims love to unjustly accuse us of using national security as a cover for imaginary repression of Muslims.

Stressing also the importance of the full respect for the freedom to seek, receive and impart information, including the fundamental importance of access to information, democratic participation, accountability and combating corruption,

Stressing importance of freedom? No, stretching the truth  past the shear point. The resolution is designed to impair our freedom to receive and impart information.

Recognizing the importance of all forms of the media, including the printed media, radio, television and the Internet, in the exercise, promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression,

That is boilerplate. Observe the following text lifted from The right to freedom of opinion and expression Human Rights Resolution 2005/38.

Recognizing the importance of all forms of the media, including the print media, radio, television and the Internet, in the exercise, promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression,

In point #9,  they skim lightly over the truth, almost exposing it to view.

Recognizes the positive contribution that the exercise of the right to freedom of expression, particularly by the media, including through information and communication technologies such as 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 and to preventing human rights abuses, but expresses regret at the promotion by certain media of false images and negative stereotypes of vulnerable individuals or groups of individuals, and at the use of information and communication technologies such as the Internet for purposes contrary to respect for human rights, in particular the perpetration of violence against and exploitation and abuse of women and children, and disseminating racist and xenophobic discourse or content;

Racism

The media can make a positive contribution to the fight against racism, … related intolerance…   Those are code words for ‘Islamophobia’.
The following quote is from Preliminary document of the African Regional Conference Preparatory to the Durban Review Conference

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;

‘Islamophobia’ is  code for opposition to Islamic supremacism, triumphalism, conquest, genocide & terrorism.  Phobia implies irrational fear or loathing. but there is nothing irrational about loathing a war cult that has murdered 270 million people in the last 1386 years.

Negative Stereotypes

Combating defamation of religions revised draft resolution

7. Expresses deep concern in this respect that Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism;

  • O11.5 [Reliance of the Traveller]

    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.

    (For further information about Islam’s human rights violations, download Islam vs Human Rights.)

Agreed Draft Resolution on the Elimination of all forms of intolerance and of discrimination based on religion or belief

13. Also emphasixes that no religion should be 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,

  • We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve 3:151
  • 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 8:12
  • 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. 8:57
  • Make ready then against them what force ye can, and strong squadrons whereby ye may strike terror into the enemy of God and your enemy, 8:60
  • I have been made victorious with terror Sahih Bukhari 4.52.220

Recalling that the exercise of the right to freedom of expression carries with it special duties and responsibilities, in accordance with article 19 (3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,

Article 19

1. Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference.

2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.

3. The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary:

(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others;

(b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals.

Telling the truth about Islam, as revealed by its own canon of scripture, tradition, exegeses & jurisprudence is not slander. It does not violate anyone’s rights, and affects only the reputation of  Islam.  Public order is not disturbed by revealing Islam’s pecadillos, it is disturbed by the Muslim’s reaction to revelation of the truth: riots incited by rabble rousing Imams at Juma Prayer meetings.

Recalling also that States should encourage free, responsible and mutually respectful dialogue,

  1. Reaffirms the rights contained in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, in particular the right of everyone to hold opinions  without interference, as well as the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art or through any other media  of their choice, and the intrinsically linked rights to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, peaceful assembly and association and the right to take part in the conduct of public affairs;
  2. Takes note of the report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression (A/HRC/l 1/4), as well as his presentation and the interactive dialogue thereon at its eleventh session;

Following a meeting on 9 December 2008, as part of the Global Forum on World Media
Development (held 7-10 December 2008 in Athens), the Special Rapporteur, along with the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Representative on Freedom of the
Media, Miklos Haraszti, the Organization of American States (OAS) Special Rapporteur on
Freedom of Expression, Catalina Botero, and the African Commission on Human and Peoples’
Rights Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information, Faith Pansy
Tlakula, issued a joint declaration on defamation of religions, and anti-terrorism and
anti-extremism legislation.
The declaration noted that the concept of “defamation of religions”
did not accord with international standards regarding defamation and that restrictions on freedom
of expression should be limited in scope to the protection of overriding individual rights and
social interests.
Restrictions should never be used to protect particular institutions or abstract
notions,
concepts or beliefs, including religious ones. The declaration further noted that
restrictions on freedom of expression to prevent intolerance should be limited in scope to
advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination,
hostility or violence and it encouraged the General Assembly and the Human Rights Council to
desist from further adoption of statements supporting the idea of defamation of religions.

[Pg. 8, #24]

The Special Rapporteur notes that freedom of expression is the manifestation of cultures,
cultural diversity, religion and ideologies. Therefore, the right to freedom of expression should
be approached with a positive view to defending it. Existing international instruments establish a
specific limit on freedom of expression. In particular, the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights provides that “any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes
incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law”
. The main
challenge thus lies in identifying at which point these thresholds are reached
. A broad
interpretation of these limitations, which has recently been suggested in international forums, is
not in line with existing international instruments and would ultimately jeopardize the full
enjoyment of human rights.
Limitations to the right to freedom of opinion and expression have
more often than not been used by States as a means to restrict criticism and silence dissent.
[Pg. 11, #39]

Limitations on freedom of expression should be clearly defined and provided by law.
Limitations should not threaten the exercise of the right itself. In addition, they ought to be
necessary and proportionate to the objective they propound to achieve, and should include the
least intrusive means insofar as freedom of expression is concerned, to prevent a chilling effect.
The adjudication of such limitations should be made by an independent judiciary. [Pg. 11, #40]

  1. Also expresses its concern that incidents of racial and religious intolerance, discrimination and related violence, as well as of negative racial and religious stereotyping continue to rise around the world, and condemns, in this context, any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, and urges States to take effective measures, consistent with their obligations under international human rights law, to address and combat such incidents;

Advocacy of  Religious Hatred

Sounds terrible, does it not?  But the level of abstraction is excessive; lets bring it down to the concrete by displaying its meaning in the real world.

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 man chiefly responsible for enforcing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights asserts that there is no right to tell the truth about Islam. [Emphasis added for clarity.] 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.

#5 “Calls upon states”,. among other things to:

h. To promote a pluralistic approach to information and multiple points of view by encouraging a diversity of ownership of media and of sources of information, including mass media, through, inter alia, transparent licensing systems and effective regulations on undue concentration of ownership of the media in the private sector;

That gem of bureaucracy is in line with Mark LLoyd’s The Center for American Progress report, “The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio” which  discusses the “Imbalance” in talk radio programming. Their attitude holds talk radio to be unfairly dominated by Conservative talk show hosts; they seed ways and means of increasing the number and proportion of Socialist talk show hosts and broadcast hours.

Simply reinstating the Fairness Doctrine will do little to address the gap between conservative and progressive talk unless the underlying elements of the public trustee doctrine are enforced, in particular, the requirements of local accountability and the reasonable airing of important matters.

License renewal previously required local engagement with the community—the solicitation of local feedback on programming and accountable public reporting of this input so that the FCC could determine if the broadcaster was upholding its public interest responsibilities.  Now licenses are renewed by “postcard,” a stamp in the corner of a scrap of paper now substitutes for all of the local interaction, very little of which is still required by law. Without these policies fostering local responsiveness, the move toward lowest common denominator syndicated programming was facilitated.

When you read that report, you will learn that shortening the renewal period, imposing local advisory boards and transferring ownership to minorities are intended to reduce the airing of criticism of  President Obama’s Socialist agenda.

Media Self Censorship

  1. Recognizes the moral and social responsibilities of the media and the importance that the media’s own elaboration of voluntary codes of professional ethical conduct can play in combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance;

The code words for ‘Islamophobia’ make another appearance. It is obvious that #8 is a demand for self censorship by the media.

Orwellian Doublespeak

  1. Reaffirms 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, combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, in line with relevant provisions of international human rights law

Freedom of expression has a positive role in combating ‘Islamophobia’. Yeah, right,  we are free to praise Islam, but not to accurately describe and condemn it.

  1. Recognizes that the open public debate of ideas, as well as interfaith and intercultural dialogue at the local, national, and international levels, can be among the best protections against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, and can play a positive role in strengthening democracy and combating national, racial or religious hatred;

Open public debate of ideas is impossible when some ideas are proscribed by law or regulations. The authors of this resolution seek to outlaw all criticism of Islam, making it illegal to reveal the fact that Islam is a war cult, not a “religion of peace”. They would outlaw revealing the foundational aspects of Jihad, genocide & terrorism.  They would not allow us to discuss Islamic laws which oppress and discriminate against women and religious  minorities.  They would silence us when we write about the insidious encroachments of Shari’ah, lawfare & demographic conquest.

While seeking to infringe on free expression, they falsely assert that they are protecting it. President Bush made a show of being on the outside, condemning the UNHRC’s attacks against free speech. President Obama has joined our attackers and is actively participating in an attempt to censor us.

Take Action!

The time for taking action has come. I urge my readers to visit the web site of a new movement to Impeach President Obama and join the movement.  President Obama is obviously part of the problem, not part of the solution.  This on line petition for Impeachment has 3,355 signatures add your signature to the list and urge everyone you can influence to endorse the petition.

The United Nations has been taken over by the enemy and is being used against us. There is no real possibility of reforming it. Now is the time to get out of that perverted institution. I urge you to sign, publicize and promote the Quit the U.N petition.

The evil doctrines of Islam including Jihad, genocide, terrorism and supremacism are static violations of ICCPR, ICERD & CPPCG.
The International Qur’an Petition contains sufficient evidence to substantiate that charge. It prays to the World Court for injunctive relief. Please endorse it, send it to your Congressman & Senators and to everyone in your email address book.  The International Qur’an Petition is our best way to turn their own tactics against them. If not now when? If not us, Who?  If we do not unite and apply great political pressure, we will loose our liberty forever. We must not let that happen!

Related Blog Posts

The following blog posts contain information about related resolutions and  documents.

October 3, 2009 Posted by | Political Correctness, United Nations | , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

AdHoc Committee: African Submission


Outline for the Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards Consultations

An additional mechanism, the Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards was created by the Human Rights Council in 2006 to fill gaps in CERD, and to provide new normative standards aimed at combating all forms of contemporary aspects of racism.

The committee’s mission is to write new international legislation to criminalize criticism of Islam. They solicited suggestions from the member nations to get the process started.

The African Group submission by Egypt, makes reference to two external documents:

The curious reader will find some satisfaction in reading the above listed “Non-Paper” and will recognize it as the source of a significant part of the African submission.

The African Group begins by laying down a list of general principles. When reading them, bear in mind the broad definition of racism, which includes “related intolerance” which translates to “Islamophobia”. Wherever “racism” is written, read criticism of Islam.

  • Although laws alone are not sufficient to eradicate racism and racial discrimination, laws remain essential to such efforts.
  • International standards on combating racism must provide for deterrence and be perceived, as far as possible, by actual and potential victims, as satisfactory.
  • No attempt to legitimize racism and racial discrimination can be tolerated in a society ruled by law.
  • The exercise of the right to freedom of expression, assembly and association may be restricted with a view to combating racism in accordance with international human rights law.
  • The prohibition of racism and racial discrimination applies to all public authorities as well as natural and legal persons, both in the public and private spheres.
  • There is a need for a uniform and consistent application of the law to ensure the effectiveness of international efforts to counter racism and racial discrimination.

The discriminating reader has learned that, according to Egypt, complementary standards for combating criticism of Islam must produce legislation sufficient to satisfy the demands of the OIC and will eliminate our right to free speech.

Seven substantive provisions are listed, the fifth of which contains several subordinate clauses of great interest.

  1. Combating incitement to racial and religious hatred. Such acts include:
    • Public insults and defamation and threats against a person or group of persons on the grounds of their race, color, language, religion, nationality, or national or ethnic origin.
    • The public expression which has the purpose or effect of denigrating a group of persons on the basis of the above-mentioned grounds.
    • The public dissemination or distribution, or the production of written, audio or visual or other material containing manifestations of racism and racial discrimination in accordance with the ICERD and the present submission.
    • In addition, these acts must be criminalized in national laws, and the perpetrators thereof punished, as well as those instigating, aiding or abetting them.

Re-read that list, bearing in mind the broader definition of “racism”, substituting “criticism of Islam” wherever it is used in the substantive provisions. These provisions will have the effect of criminalizing all negative expressions about Islam, not just the Danish Cartoons, and Fitna, but these blog posts will be illegal.

August 3, 2009 Posted by | Political Correctness | , , | 3 Comments

Ahmadinejad: UN Racism Conference Part 5


[Statement by the Islamic Republic of Iran as delivered (unofficial transcript)]

Worse than this is that some Western governments and America are committed to support genocidal racists while others condemn the bombardment of innocent human beings, the occupation of their land and the disasters that took place in Gaza.

President Ahmadinejad, addressing the United Nations Racism Conference in Geneva, asserted that Israel is a genocidal racist. His assertion is a classic case of projection; the pot calling the kettle black. Genocide is an intrinsic sacrament of Islam, sacramentalized by Al-Anfal 67 & Muhammad 4.

  • 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.
  • 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).

Genocide is exemplified by Moe’s slaughter of  the men and boys of a peaceful Jewish settlement near Madina. and prophesied for the end time in another saying.

  • 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.
  • 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.

Islamic racism is not so flagrantly demonstrated, but there are powerful hints.

  • Bukhari Volume 1, Book 11, Number 662:
    Narrated Anas:
    The Prophet said, “Listen and obey (your chief) even if an Ethiopian whose head is like a raisin were made your chief.”
  • Abu Dawud Book 36, Number 4266: Narrated Jabir ibn Samurah:

    The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: The religion will continue to be established till there are twelve caliphs over you, and the whole community will agree on each of them. I then heard from the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) some remarks which I could not understand. I asked my father: What is he saying: He said: all of them will belong to Quraysh.

The murder cult which committed genocide against the Banu Qurayzah, Hindus, Assyrians & Armenians and is currently engaged in genocide in Darfur accuses its intended victims of genocide and does so in an international forum with the whole world listening.  The murder cult whose ruler must be born of a particular tribe accuses its intended victims  of racism.  Ahmadinejad should be the poster boy for arrogance

May 9, 2009 Posted by | Political Correctness, United Nations | , | Leave a comment

%d bloggers like this: