There is a sucker born every minute, because if we did not suck, we would not survive. Unfortunately, there is a surplus of adult bottom feeders who will cheerfully take and run with any bait. A Google search for UN + "Defamation of Religions" turned up several news articles in addition to those in yesterday's alert.
Human Rights First - 5 hours ago Human Rights First has worked for years to reverse the tide of defamation of religions at the UN , and has welcomed HRC resolution 16/18 as well as this most recent General Assembly resolution. We believe it is important for governments to now... |
Canada Free Press - Dec 19, 2011 The Obama administration started down this ill-advised road by cosponsoring in 2009 an OIC-drafted resolution in the UNHuman Rights Council that condemned “defamation of religion” – read, Islam. That initiative helped advance the Islamists' ... |
| Blogs | 1 new result for "Defamation of Religions" | |
| |
UN condemns religious intolerance, drops 'defamation' line for first ...
By Louis Charbonneau
For the first time in more than a decade, the U.N. General Assembly on Monday condemned religious intolerance without urging states to outlaw defamation of religions, an appeal critics said opened the door to abusive blasphemy laws.
FaithWorld |
Only two out of twelve articles reflect objective factual reality, the rest swallow the bait. That is not a good sign. Lets sneak around the gate of the defamation meme and examine the core issue. Words have meanings, but Muslims assign their own meanings to common words.We must not assume that those words mean what they say when spoken by Muslims.
The opening of the 15
th session of the Human Rights Council was marked by an
address from Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, Secretary General of the OIC.
The new session of the Council is also coincides with with
regrettable events that are
deliberately meant to defame religions as well incite hatred, xenophobia, discrimination and
violence against religions, in particular Islam. The increasing incidents of violence and
discrimination on the basis of religion must not be ignored. We hope that this and other
related issues remain an important priority in the work of the Council.
The most recent and unfortunate in the series of such events was the
announcement pertaining to Bum a Koran Day. It was
highly provocative towards the religious sentiments of Muslims everywhere in the world and must be condemned in the strongest possible terms.
On August 24,2010 I issued a cautionary statement on the plan to burn the Holy Qur'an and
urged the American people as a whole as well as the world community to reject the call of the
Gainesville Church pastor[....]
In this regard all xenophobic campaigns of fear mongering and discriminatory
measures - both in policy and practice - which restrict, prohibit or discriminate against of any
religion such as ban on the constriction of minarets, organization of
events that incite hatred like Burn a Koran Day, and other discriminatory measures must be
strongly condemned by the international community. A recurrence of such events substantiate
OIC's call for a normative approach to deal with this menace that continues to
pose a clear 'and present danger to peace, security 'and stability in the regional as well as the global context. Such acts fuel
discrimination, extremism and mis-perception leading to polarization and fragmentation with
dangerous unintendecl ancl unforeseen consequences.[...]
[...]such events which
endanger peaceful coexistence between nations and create an environment conducive to violence The first three sentences quoted above are loaded with meaning which must be dissected and examined.
regrettable events
In this case, one event: International Burn The Qur'an Day, which was scheduled for 09/11/10 to commemorate the accursed abomination by highlighting the Qur'an verses which inspired it. The event was called off under intense government pressure.
deliberately meant to
How does anyone know the intention of the event unless it is clearly stated? The stated purpose of the event was to foster awareness of Islamic doctrines and their real world consequences. But Ihsanoglu assigns other intentions which he projects onto the event from afar.
defame religions
Defamation is false and malicious. What is false about connecting the dots;
Allah's sanctification of terror, his
casting terror resulting in death, captivity & dispossession, Moe's
bragging about terror making him victorious and the abominable act motivated by
Allah's imperative,
threat and
promise?
incite
Pastor Jones was not inciting anyone to do anything more than incinerate the book which inspired the "Magnificent 19". Nothing was to be said, implied or illustrate to incite anyone to assault Muslims. He issued no war cry or call to arms and implied none.
hatred
It is only natural for a nation under attack and threat of attack to hate its attackers and the damnable doctrines which motivate them and inspire them to attempt genocide & politicide. No incitement is needed to make intelligent and informed Americans hate Islam.
discrimination
People naturally make choices. If we choose to avoid association with and proximity to persons made inimical to us by their ideology, that is discrimination, but it is not evil.
Hating a man for his skin pigment is evil. Hating a man because he adheres to an ideology which enjoins him to kill or enslave you is not evil, it is common sense. Warning people about that ideology and its consequences is not inciting hatred. Hatred is incited by the ideology and the acts it inspires.
violence
When Pastor Jones tried and burned a Qur'an in March of 2011, rioting broke out in Pakistan. The riots were not incited by anything in Gainesville, they were incited by what was preached in the mosques at Jumah Salat. The politicians and media dare not make the connection between the riots and the end of Friday afternoon sermons. Instead, they prefer to blame an unrelated event separated by thousands of miles and several days.
events that incite hatred
Beirut Embassy bombing
USS Cole bombing
WTC1
WTC2
Beslan Massacre
Mumbai Massacre
London subway bombing
Madrid rail bombing
endanger peaceful coexistence
Trying and burning a Qur'an did not start a war; what did? have you forgotten? When such a threat is issued, why do we lift Satan's tail and pucker up?
Defamation, while prominently cited, is not the issue. Examine this transcript of remarks by Pakistan's Ambassador at the 16th session of the HRC.
Pakistan (on behalf of
the OIC)
Mr. Zamir Akram
03/24/11
Thank you Mr. President. On behalf of the OIC countries, I have the
honor to introduce the draft resolution entitled “combating
intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization of and
discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against persons
based on religion or belief contained in document L.38.
Mr. President: this resolution addresses
a number of issues over which the OIC has been expressing concern over the years. having said that, I wish to state categorically
that this resolution does not replace earlier resolutions on combating defamation. which were adopted by the Human Rights Council and remain valid. This resolution L.38 is an attempt on the
part of the oic to build consensus on an issue of vital importance
not only to Muslims but to people of all religions and beliefs by
identifying ways and means to deal with the growing problems of
religious incitement and discrimination and incitement to hatred and violence based on
religion or belief.
At the heart of this resolution are a
series of practical steps which need to be taken by states in order to address
this problem. This resolution addresses the
core issues in a manner
that is
acceptable to all including in a legal sense, thus
seeking to bring all stake holders on board. The OIC has gone
the extra mile to maintain a spirit of constructive engagement with all
partners during this process of consultation.
Our primary objective is to ensure that this text,
which will hopefully be adopted by consensus, will
bind us all to the commitments contained therein and oblige us all to ensure compliance with its decisions. Mr. President: Muslims around the world continue to be confronted
with ever increasing instances of intolerance, negative stereotyping,
stigmatization, discrimination and violence on the basis of their religion; Islam.
Objective academic studies reveal that following the end of the cold war, the
pernicious doctrine of a clash of civilizations signaled the start of a narrative that required
the construction of a new enemy to replace the global threat of
Communism with the so-called menace of Islam.
The reprehensible acts of terrorism on September 11,
2001 provided the trigger to unleash the clash of civilizations to the
forefront of global politics. In the general Western view, no
distinction was made between a
handful of extremists and terrorists and the overwhelming majority of peaceful and law abiding Muslims living around the world. To make matters worse, against the backdrop of
the recent global economic crisis,
these fears of Islam and Muslims are now being manipulated by irresponsible and bigoted Western politicians to gain political mileage in their countries, unfortunately, with remarkable success. Terms such as Islamofascists have become common.
Even the Qur’an has not been spared; it has been compared to Hitler’s
Mein Kampf. More recently,
it was tried for religious crimes and burnt. Minarets at mosques deliberately depicted on posters as missiles, have been banned. There have even been restrictions on
shops selling halal food, while no such restrictions exist on kosher
food outlets which are similar.
There is also increasing discrimination against Muslims in various
parts of the world. They are being subjected to
racial profiling which confronts them with intractable problems at every border where
they are checked and re-checked. Their businesses are repeatedly
scrutinized and their places of worship disallowed or desecrated.
They are made to feel unwelcome in societies where they live as
minorities.
One prominent politician has recently organized hearings that seek to put on trial the entire Muslim community and are obviously designed to stoke fears against Muslims in that country. Mr. President, the efforts by the oic to
defend our religion, our holy book and our prophet and our people have
often been misrepresented as being contrary to international human
rights principles and laws, and in particular, rejected as undermining
the freedom of expression or opinion. The reality is different.
It is therefore appropriate in such a position, for us to try and
explain our faith and our principles. I hope, Mr. President, you will
give me a bit of extra time to do so.
Mr. President: the Qur’an lays great emphasis on the
need for religious tolerance as well as freedom of thought and
opinion. In chapter 2, verse 256, the Qur’an states there is no
compulsion in religion. In chapter 18, verse 29, the Qur’an
maintains that truth is from your Lord, so let him who please believe
and him who please disbelieve. As regards freedom of
thought and opinion in Islam, the Qur’an states, in chapter 16, in verse 125 invite
all to the way of your creator with wisdom and arguments that are the
best and most gracious. The Qur’an and the traditions of the holy
prophet also lay emphasis on the treatment of non-Muslims.
According to Prophet Muhammad, (PBUH), he who hurts a non-Muslim
citizen of a Muslim state I am his adversary and I shall be his
adversary on the day of judgment.
Mr. President: it is also instructive for us to know
that we Muslims are not only bound by temporal laws to respect human
rights but by divine enjunctions contained in the Qur’an. The
basic human rights as ordained in the Qur’an include the
rights to life, individual freedom, justice, equality, privacy, association
and basic necessities of life or minimum standard of living. These
obligations also include respect for women, equality among human
beings, freedom of expression, protection from arbitrary imprisonment
and the right to oppose tyranny and injustice. the last sermon of
the prophet (PBUH) is, in itself, a comprehensive charter of human
rights. Islam has even established a complete code for the right
of combatants in war. Measures for the protection of all combatants as
well as homes and property belonging to them.
Mr. President: I have dwelt at length on these characteristics of Islam
because I want to underscore the common principles that underlie our
faith and the requirements of international law including international
human rights and humanitarian law. Indeed, given the tremendous
contributions by Islam in various fields of human activity over
the years, these principles have contributed to the evolution of
the very principles that we are trying to uphold today.
Mr. President, we sincerely believe that that irrespective of our
different cultural backgrounds and traditions, there is a shared
interest for all of us to show respect for each other’s religions and
beliefs as well as to prevent any advocacy of religious hatred and
intolerance, discrimination and incitement on the basis of religion or
belief.
The resolution under consideration seeks to achieve
these laudable objectives through a range of actions by states
including administrative steps,
measures to criminalize imminent violence, training and awareness programs, promotion of dialogue and
understanding at all levels. The resolution also calls for
a
global dialogue for the promotion of a culture of tolerance and peace and in this context it decides to convene a panel discussion in the
Human Rights Council. We hope that this resolution will be
adopted by consensus. Before concluding, Mr. President, I would
like to place on record my appreciation for the support and cooperation
of all my colleagues in the oic and in particular, members of
the core group of ambassadors that we set up to work out this
resolution. I have truly benefited from the wisdom and advice and
without their support this text would not have been possible. I
would also like to thank the Secretary General of the oic whose
support and guidance made this resolution possible. In addition I
would like to express my appreciation — my sincere appreciation to all
our partners in the various groups, especially the ambassadors of the
U.S. and the U.K. on behalf of the European Union for their cooperative
and constructive approach. Let me also thank the ambassadors from
the African group, grulac and Croatia for their cooperation and
engagement in this effort. I am glad that this oic initiative has
met with broad cross regional support which will send out a strong
message of unity from this council. Finally I would like to thank
the experts from Pakistan, the U.S., the U.K. and other countries for
their tireless efforts to work out the text of this resolution. I thank
you Mr. president.
Akram's screed contains numerous lies, which have been dissected in
another blog post.
number of issues
To see what Akram was talking about, read the
Islamophobia Report for April '11. The three principal exemplars are the
Motoons,
Fitna and the above mentioned Qur'an burning.
The ostensible objection to depicting Moe is idolatry. There are two problems with that. First, Moe ain't supposed to be the deity, Allah is. Second, nobody would possibly make those cartoons an object of idolatry. The real reason for objecting to their publication is their depicting Moe as a terrorist.
Moe could not have possessed a bomb because he died prior to the invention of gunpowder. Moe cast terror by a series of barbarian attacks, deliberately building a reputation for barbarian repine, so that he was
more feared than Allah. Moe bragged about being made victorious by
awe &
terror. What more do you need to know to make a judgment?
The 15 minute documentary juxtaposes Qur'an verses and ahadith with the rabid rants of Imams at Jumah Salat and resulting acts of terror and rioting. Fitna does not incite violence, it exposes incitement.
Fitna: Supporting Documentation 03/27/08 documents the ayat quoted in the documentary. Though words have meanings, we must be aware of the meanings intended by Muslims. HRC 16/18 &
Draft resolution XVII appear to concentrate on incitement.
Condemns any advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to
discrimination, hostility or violence, whether it involves the use of print, audiovisual
or electronic media or any other means;
(e) Speaking out against intolerance, including advocacy of religious hatred
that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence;
(0 Adopting measures to criminalize the incitement to imminent violence
based on religion or belief;
incitement
What is it? Am I inciting hatred and violence by exposing the damnable doctrines of Islam which inculcate hatred and incite violence? There is only one way to know the meaning: we must examine recent exemplary statements. This one, by Secretary Ban Ki-moon is dispositive.
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." According to the Secretary General, Fitna constitutes hate speech & incitement not protected by freedom of expression. From that statement, it is clear tha the intention of HRC 16/18 and
Draft resolution XVII is to criminalize all criticism of Islam.
negative stereotyping
What is the difference between stereotyping and defamation? Because Moe was a terrorist, who
commanded Muslims to emulate himself, and because
Allah commanded terrorism, Muslims are
commanded to obey Allah and because
selectivity is prohibited, all Muslims are potential terrorists. To the extent that they are
believers in Allah, his promise and his threat, they will eventually participate in an attack. If it were not true, this paragraph would be defamatory. Even though it is true, it is negative and it is stereotyping, condemned by the resolutions. In any case,
defamation
Islam is terrorism! Allah sanctified it & engaged in it. Moe bragged about being made victorious by it. To those bigots who who deny the obvious facts previously documented by reference to the Qur'an & hadth, this is defamatory. Previous resolutions condemned associating Islam with terrorism. These resolutions omit that meme, so, has the UN abandoned the defamation meme?
HELL NO!!! And I will prove it.
Draft resolution XVII ain't the only resolution passed by acclamation Dec. 19. I know something you don't know but are about to find out.
Also emphasizes 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;
¶10, on page 3 of
Draft resolution XVIII, emphasizes that Islam must not be equated with terrorism, which it is by the testimony of its own deity & founder previously cited. Equation with terrorism fits the defamation meme, and it has not been dropped or abandoned by the UN, it lives on in a concurrent resolution. The suckers have swallowed the bait, hook, line and sinker.
¶12(j), on page 4, belies the assertion that freedom of expression is not threatened.
To take all necessary and appropriate action, in conformity with
international standards of human rights, to combat hatred, discrimination,
intolerance and acts of violence, intimidation and coercion motivated by intolerance
based on religion or belief, as well as incitement to hostility and violence, with
particular regard to members of religious minorities in all parts of the world;
For the Morons among my readers, "all necessary and appropriate action" means legislation to combat "incitement to hostility and violence", which means: Fitna, the Motoons and this blog post.
No doubt the Moronic chorus will begin chanting: "that ain't in the resolution under discussion". To which I gleefully reply:
Ye Suckers!!! Assumptions make asses of you!
Adopting measures to criminalize the incitement to imminent violence
based on religion or belief;
¶5(f) on page 5 of Draft resolution XVII, proves you wrong. "Adopting measures to criminalize" is a code phrase for legislation. They are demanding passage & enforcement to establish criminal punishment for publications such as Fitna, the Motoons and this blog post. Remember, Ban Ki-Moon defined the terms for us.
Legislation to criminalize the publication of Fitna, the Motoons and this blog post will not limit free speech. Yeah, right ;=(
If you love liberty, you will sign, share and promote this petition to preserve the First Amendment against the above described resolutions and the Istanbul Process.
http://www.petition2congress.com/5741/preserve-first-amendment-from-attack-by-oic/ 
