Hedaya 2.140 Annotated

Hedaya 2.141 Annotated

Preserve the First Amendment from Attack by the OIC!

Tuesday, August 04, 2009

Ad Hoc Cmte: Non-Paper

On December 5, 2008, there was issued, on the letterhead of the High Commissioner For Human Rights, by Ambassador Idriss Jazairy, President of the Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards, a "Non-Paper Paper" and a cover letter explaining its purpose. [Emphasis & links added.]
[Due to the use of OCR to extract quotes from scanned document images, there will be some spelling errors and a few Anglicized words will be Americanized. ]
The purpose of this "Non paper" is to stimulate a constructive debate on the content and the framework of major areas of vulnerability which for reasons of substance and/or of procedure suffer from protection gaps. Some of these areas are related to the contemporary manifestations of racism, ~ racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.The purpose of this "Non-paper" is also to invite concrete responses and recommendations based on its content.
The Ambassador set forth the Non Paper's terms of reference.
  • Paragraph 199 of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action that recommended to the Commission on Human Rights, now replaced by the Human Rights Council, to elaborate complementary intenational standards aimed at strengthening and updating international instruments against all forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.
  • Decision 3/IO3 of the Human Rights Council that decides, in pursuance of decision and instruction of the 2001 World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance to establish an Ad Hoc Committee of the Human Rights Council with the mandate to elaborate, as a matter of priority and necessity, complementary standards in the form of either a convention or additional protocol (s) to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racism, racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and related Intolerance that will ill the existing gaps in the Convention and also provide new normative texts aimed at combating all forms of contemporary racism, including incitement to racial and religious hatred.
  • Resolution 6/21 of the Human Rights Council on the elaboration of new international complementary standards to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
The following listed phrases are critical because they are encoded to conceal the true intentions of the committee.
  • all forms of racism
  • related intolerance
  • incitement to racial and religious hatred
We must always bear in mind how the United Nations twist the English language!!! 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;
Islamophobia = racism!!!

The Ambassador directed the member states to keep in mind::
all views expressed and contributions made within the framework of the follow-up mechanisms of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, including:
  • The survey of the five experts on the nature and the scope of substantive gaps, with regard to issues of content in the existing international instruments to combat racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance (A/HRC/4/W G.3/ 6) ;
  • The document of the Committee on the Elimination of racial discrimination on possible measures to strengthen the implementation of the final observations by adopting new recommendations by updating its monitoring procedures (All-IRC/4/WG.3/7)
  • The responses provided by the Committee ou the Elimination of racial discrimination to the questionnaire by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights pursuant to decision PC.1/ 10 of the Preparatory Committee of the Durban Review Conference (A/CON'F.2l1/PC.2/CRP.5) including the relevant points of view made by the Members ofthe Committee on behalf ofthe latter; ~
  • The Report of the 5th session of the Intergovernmental Working Group on the Effective implementation of the Durban Conference and Prcgrarnmc of Action (A/HCR/6/10) and all relevant recommendations and conclusions adopted by this Group since its creation, particularly those contained in document(AH.CR/AC.!/I/CRP.2);
  • The discussions that took place during the first session of the Ad hoc Committee on complementary standards, held from 18 to 2l February 2008.
The Ambassador lists the following revelations from the two previous sessions.
  • There is global collective agreement and commitment expressed during the 2001 World Conference against racism on the principle of claborating international complementary standards to strengthen and update the international instruments against all forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance (para 199 of the Durban Programme of Action);
  • However, no consensus was reached on how the specific form of/manner of giving concrete expression to this commiuncnt in priciple;
  • We must also bear in mind the ensuing debate on the links between articles 19 and 20 of the International Covenant on civil and political rights and the expert meeting of 2 and 3 October 2008, whereafter it was reiterated that the fundamental right of freedom of expression is compatible with the prohibition of any call for national, racial or religious hatred which constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility and violence;
  • It is thus imperative to reach the largest possible agreement, through the Ad hoc Committee on complementary standards, on concrete ways and means to implement the commitment in principle made: during the 2001 World Conference against racism.
  • The approach suggested to achieve this goal is to stimulate, in a positive and inclusive spirit, concrete proposals on the fields and themes laid out in the "Non paper" for which complementary standardized provisions or other measures designed to fill protection gaps, are necessary.
Of course, the revelations repeat certain code phrases.
  • all forms of racism
  • related intolerance
Next, we encounter a reference to ICCPR.
  • the fundamental right of freedom of expression is compatible with the prohibition of any call for national, racial or religious hatred which constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility and violence
Muslims, liars, lawyers & U.N. bureaucrats do not use words the way normal people do. "call for national, racial or religious hatred which constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility and violence" means any criticism of Islam, specifically the Danish Cartoons & Fitna. In this context, it is asserted that censorship of criticism of Islam does not interfere with freedom of expression.

The Non-Paper begins with a listing of its Purpose, scope and parameters:
  • Implementing paragraph 199 of the Programme of Action of the World Conference against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, in which the Conference "Rec0Recommends that the Commission on Human Rights prepare complementary international standards
  • to strengthen and update international instruments against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance in all their aspects", as well as the relevant Human Rights Council resolutions, in particular decision 3/103 .
  • The need to enhance efforts to counter contemporary and emerging forms of manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.
  • The need to strengthen the monitoring procedures of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination with a view to enable it to undertake the responsibilities entrusted to it in a more effective manner.
  • The need to address double or multiple discrimination a continuing source of concern, as it affects certain individuals and groups, in particular gender-related racial discrimination and double discrimination on the grounds of race and religion.
  • The imperative to ensure that measures to combat terrorism respect the fundamental principles and the universally recognized standards of international law, international human rights law and international humanitarian Law.
  • The urgency of addressing racial profiling and eliminating it as a pervasive form of discrimination.
  • The need for uniform and consistent application of the law at the national and international levels to ensure the effectiveness of international efforts to counter racism and racial discrimination.
  • The need to recognize that The prohibition of the dissemination of all ideas based upon racial superiority or hatred and the prohibition of incitement to national, racial -· or religious hatred are compatible with the freedom of opinion and expression.
  • The principle of regarding provocative portrayals of objects of religious veneration as a malicious violation of the spirit of tolerance which must also be a feature of democratic society.
  • The need to re-emphasize that the prohibition of publication of material with the aim of protecting the rights of others and against seriously or gratuitously offensive attacks on matters regarded as sacred by the followers of any religion is a legitimate State objective.
  • The need for national and international law to provide adequate legal responses to propaganda of a racist and xenophobia nature committed through computer systems.
  • The need to follow the growing trend in many States to include, in their criminal I legislation, offenses in which religious motives are an aggravating factor.
Once again, the code phrases rear their ugly heads.
  • related intolerance = Islamophobia = any criticism of Islam.
  • contemporary and emerging forms of manifestations of racism = Islamophobia = any criticism of Islam.
  • measures to combat terrorism respect the fundamental principles and the universally recognized standards of intemational law, international human rights law and international humanitarian Law. This is a direct attack on surveillance of young Muslim males, such as the "magnificent 19" and other perpetrators of mass casualty attacks. Suspicion of Muslims = "racial profiling":.
  • racial profiling
  • The need to recognize that The prohibition of the dissemination of all ideas based upon racial superiority or hatred and the prohibition of incitement to national, racial -· or religious hatred are compatible with the freedom of opinion and expression. A repetition of the egregious attack upon free speech. The reference is to the Danish Cartoons and Fitna.
  • provocative portrayals of objects of religious veneration as a malicious violation of the spirit of tolerance This is another reference to the Danish Cartoons.
  • The need to re-emphasize that the prohibition of publication of material with the aim of protecting the rights of others and against seriously or gratuitously offensive attacks on matters regarded as sacred by the followers of any religion is a legitimate State objective. Refer to the quotes from Reliance of the Traveller in the initial post of this series.
  • propaganda of a racist and xenophobia nature committed through computer systems. This is an attack upon blog posts and web sites which expose Islam's damnable doctrines.
Eight specific themes are listed, here is #3.
3- Terrorism, racial discrimination and racial profiling:
  1. A definition of racial profiling, prioritizing human rights protection, could be elaborated and agreed upon.
  2. States must ensure that measures to combat terrorism do not discriminate, in purpose or effect on ·grounds of race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin, as well as on religious grounds, bearing in mind in this context the intersectionality between racial and religious discrimination.
  3. Profiling based on stereotypes founded on grounds of discrimination prohibited by international law, including on racial, ethnic and/or religious grounds must be prohibited by law.
Who practices terrorism? Are the majority of terror attacks perpetrated by little old ladies from Iceland? Terrorism is an intrinsic sacrament of Islam, established as such by 3:151, 8:12., 8:60, 33:26, 59:2 & 59:13. When you hear hoof beats, they probably come from horses, not from unicorns. Profiling according to current trends in the identity of perpetrators is common sense. Islam is acting through the UN to disarm us.

The fifth listed theme gets down to detail.
5- Incitement to racial, national and religious hatred
  1. There is a need for further clarifying and reinforcing at the international level existing obligations on the eradication of all incitement to hatred and ' discrimination in any form and to prohibit by law, propaganda for war and advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.
  2. In this context, complementary standards to be developed should observe the following parameters:
    • Article 4 of ICERD shall be extended to the crime of incitement to racial hatred covering offenses motivated by religious hatred against immigrant communities.
    • The protection provided shall extend to all individuals and groups within the jurisdiction of the State Party.
    • The prohibitions shall equally cover acts committed by any individual, group or organization, including political and media organizations as well as by national or local public authorities.
    • The provisions shall apply to any act which, in purpose or effect, incites discrimination, hostility or violence.
    • In order to achieve consistent and uniform application and maximize protection for actual or potential victims, any doubt as to the existence of a causal link between an act of incitement and the likelihood of a violation, or the threshold required for reaching such a determination, shall be interpreted in a consistent and coherent manner at the national and international levels so as to ensure appropriate protection of the concerned individuals or groups.
    • Addressing acts constituting incitement shall apply whether such acts have aims which are internal or external to the State concerned.
    • Requisite standards would explicitly not prohibit advocacy of the sovereign right to self-defence or the right of peoples to self-determination and independence in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
    • Requisite complementary standards shall include the prohibition of publication of material that direct seriously offensive attacks on matters regarded by followers of any religion or belief as sacred or inherent to their dignity as human beings, with the aim of protecting them against such attacks.
  3. In line with the above parameters, States' general obligations would include:
    • Undertaking to promulgate, where they do not exist, a specific legislation prohibiting any propaganda for war and any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.
    • Asserting, in the relevant specific legislation, that such propaganda and advocacy are contrary to public policy.
    • Providing for appropriate sanction, including of a criminal nature, in case of violation.
The listed item under sub section c would appear to be straightforward. It is not. Muslims, liars, lawyers and U.N. Bureaucrats do not use the English language to communicate, they use it to deceive! In evidence whereof I cite the egregious remarks of the Secretary General on the subject of Fitna, the short documentary by Girt Wielders.

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.”

Fitna does not incite violence, it documents incitement contained in the Qur'an and propagated by Imams in their Mosques

The program of the Ad Hoc Committee runs parallel to the programs of the General Assembly and Human Rights Council in their resolutions combating "defamation of religion" and that of the Durban II review conference. Those programs are documented in detail and their egregious hypocrisy exposed and documented in the following listed blog posts..

Monday, August 03, 2009

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.

AdHoc Cmte USA 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. Islam, because it is false and malicious, can not tolerate criticism. Islamic law prescribes the death penalty for any criticism of Allah, Moe, and their doctrines. Muslims, acting through the OIC and its clique in the United Nations, are demanding the enactment and enforcement of national and international legislation to criminalize criticism of Islam. While specifically complaining of the Danish Cartoons and the short documentary created by Geert Wilders, their demand for censorship is much broader.

Unlike Iran and Pakistan, the United States did not submit demands for criminalizing criticism of Islam. Unfortunately, the two page submission, which begins on page 26, displays an a high level of cognitive dissonance. [ Emphasis added.]
The United States wishes to reiterate its committment to fighting racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and looks forward to working with other States contributing to initiatives that promote tolerance and respect for diversity. The United States is home to individuals from diverse racial, religions and ethnic backgrounds. .We are profoundly aware of the destructive consequences of racism and understand the concerns that have given rise to the work of this Committee.
"Related intolerance" is a code phrase for "Islamophobia", which is equated with racism. There is no rational basis for fighting rational objections to Islamic doctrine and practice!

The United States has learned from the experience in our own country how crucial robust free expression and a thriving marketplace of ideas are to the promotion of tolerance, religious freedom, greater understanding among individuals of different backgrounds, and ultimately to the defeat of racist and discriminatory ideas in societies. Similarly, the United States believes in the importance of engaging in proactive governmental outreach and policies to
assure racial, ethnic, and religious groups are protected and respect for diversity is promoted. Such governmental outreach can take a variety of forms, including the holding of town hall meetings and conferences with affected groups to listen and learn of the challenges they face and develop ways for the government to better address their concerns. These actions, which are based upon a moral and social responsibility to combat advocacy to national, racial or religious
hatred, rather than a legal obligation to punish hateful expression, are essential to simultaneously maintaining robust free expression and allowing the government to take an active role in the promotion of tolerance and respect.
This would appear, at first glance to be a robust defense of our first amendment freedom of expression. But an examination of the first listed objective throws a bucket of cold water on that hope. "promotion of tolerance", in this context, can only mean tolerance of the intolerable: Islam.

Combating advocacy to religious hatred requires combating Islam because Islamic doctrine expressed in the Qur'an is the primary source of religion based hatred.

"Rather than a legal obligation to punish hateful expression" is a loaded clause which, while appearing to deny demands for blasphemy laws, actually condemns the Danish Cartoons, Fitna, and all other truthful negative expressions about Islam. as "hate speech".

"Promotion of Tolerance and respect" is an indication of irrational idocy. In the current context, it can only mean "tolerance of and respect for Islam". Islam is not worthy of respect and must never be tolerated because it is perpetual war and confers an open season license to kill, enslave, rape, pillage & plunder.


The United States does not believe that amendments to the international human rights legal framework - or new interpretations of existing legal obligations - are warranted to fight the scourges cf racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. Rather than seeking additional restrictions to expression, the United States advocates for more robust governmental outreach policies with respect to racial, ethnic and religious groups as well as the institution of appropriate legal regimes that deal with discriminatory acts and hate crimes.
Nothing is warranted to fight "related intolerance", which is a code phrase for opposition to Islam. Ordinarily, I would happily accept the rejection of Islam's contumacious demand for legislation unconstitutionally restricting my right of free expression. But that rejection is coupled with an implicit acceptance of the enemy's false premise, which renders it null and void.

The United States views racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance as serious challenges facing the international community and believes they must be dealt with by the Ad Hoc Committee in a methodical and deliberate manner. The United States submits that this process of self-examination and action by international community begin with greater opporttutities to exchange views and address empirical data and practice on matters related to racial, ethnic, and religious diversity, discrimination, and intolerance so as to broaden our common understanding of these important issues and provide a solid foundation f or a broad-based consensus further actions and initiatives.
Inclusion of "related intolerance", which refers to objections to Islamic doctrine & practice, implicitly accepts the enemy's false premise and can not be accepted. It makes me ashamed to be an American. How can my government sink so low as to condemn my advocacy of life & liberty and demand that I tolerate the existence of a predatory institution whose mission is mercenary and whose method is to deprive free men of life, liberty and property?


The submission offers a list of suggested substitutes for the legislative program demanded by Islam. It proposes to study the cause of "advocacy of hatred", ignoring the fact that the damnable doctrines enshrined in the Qur'an, preached in every Mosque and taught in every Madrassa, are the principal source of that advocacy.

Another suggestion constitutes an irrational surrender.

  • Evolution of Legal and Policy Frameworks: An assessment of the evolution of domestic legal and policy frameworks dealing with these issues and how effective they have been in dealing with intolerance and discrimination. Such an assessrnent would also review any distinctions made within these frameworks between actions taken based upon a moral and social responsibility to combat advocacy to national, racial or religious hatred on the one hand and those based upon a legal obligation to prohibit such advocacy on the other, and analyze the relative results of each;
To the extent that a person is rational and informed, he will hate Islam, and no attempt should be made to reduce his ardor or extinguish the fire of hatred. Islam is inimical to human life and liberty. Its supremacism, triumphalism and intolerance render it intolerable. The concept of a divine mandate to conquer the world, terrorizing and killing or enslaving everyone who resists is absolutely intolerable. How can there be a legal obligation to prevent rational discussion of the doctrines and practices of a religion of world domination through genocidal warfare?

While ostensibly objecting to demands for legislation eliminating our right of free expression, our government is actually pandering and attempting to appease the enemy by implicitly accepting their false premise.

AdHoc Cmte: Pakistani 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.

Pakistan's submission to the committee begins on page 39 and ends on page 41. Since Pakistan acts as the representative of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, there is an emphasis on protecting Islam from criticism. It refers to Human Rights Council decision 3/103, which created the committee, and to ICERD.

The submission lists several "Action Points", the following items are from that list. [Emphasis added.]
  • further defining the existence of link between an act of incitement and the likelihood of a violation, or the threshold required for reaching such a determinant consistent and uniform application and maximize protection for actual or potential victims.
  • development of new internationally binding normative standards in the area of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance while incorporating the following contemporary issues;
    • defamation of religions, religious personalities, holy books, scriptures and symbols,
    • provocative portrayals of objects of religious veneration as a malicious ` violation of the spirit of tolerance,
    • prohibition of publication of material with the aim of protecting the rights of others and against seriously or gratuitously offensive attacks on matters regarded as sacred by the followers of any religion,
    • racio-religious profiling,intolerance and discrimination,
    • incitement to religious hatred, discrimination and violence,
    • abuse of the right to freedom of expression in the context of racio-religious profiling, negative or insulting stereotyping, incitement to
      hatred and violence,
    • Islamophobia, xenophobia, and ideological racism,
  • new instrument should provide for;
    • mandatory prohibition by law to- eliminate racio-religious profiling or profiling based on any grounds of discrimination recognized under
      international human rights law with provisions for legal action against perpetrators, as well as legal guarantees to remedy and reparation for victims,
    • legal restrictions on the dissemination or distribution or production, in public or otherwise, of all ideas in any farm based upon racial and religious superiority or hatred and incitement to hatred, and violence,including by use of modern information and communication technologies,
    • legal prohibition of publication of material that negatively stereotypes, insults, or uses offensive language cm matters regarded by followers of any religion or belief as sacred or inherent to their dignity as human beings, with the aim or protecting their fundamental human rights,
    • legal restriction to public insults and defamation, public incitement to violence, threat against a person or a grouping of persons
      on me grounds of their race, color, language, religion, nationality, or national or ethnic origin,
The bottom line: Pakistan & the OIC join with Iran in demanding national and international legislation to criminalize criticism of Islam. Western Civilization is under attack by Islam. Effective and adequate defense requires objective identification & description of the enemy and its doctrine set. The proposals from Iran & Pakistan are designed to hamper our self defense efforts.

They imply that the Danish Cartoons, which portray Muhammad as a terrorist, which, by his own admission he was, constitutes defamation of religion. They imply that Fitna, which juxtaposes Allah's Jihad imperatives in the Qur'an with Islamic violence, constitutes defamation of religion. They demand that all such expressions be criminalized.

Saturday, August 01, 2009

Ad Hoc Cmte: Iranian 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 Iranian submission begins on page 12 of the pdf. and ends on page 17. Although capturing the attitude & meaning of the document through excerpts is not satisfactory, I will not reproduce the entire five page submission here. You can click through to the pdf file and enter 12 in the page window to go directly to the full text of the submission.

The pdf is a scanned document, requiring the use of ocr to cull excerpts. Unfortunately, the printer which created the document needs a head cleaning, and the plate on which it was scanned is dusty, so that ocr was extremely difficult. I have therefore run the spelling checker on the excerpts, they may deviate slightly from the original, but care has been taken to avoid changing the meaning of the text. [Emphasis added.]

The Iranian submission is not novel, it rehashes malicious malarkey from previous resolutions. The following documents were referenced in the text.
They are off to a fast start in their Introduction, asserting that Islamophobia is a growing trend, becoming pervasive and often officially condoned.
The growing trend of defamation of religions is arising from the following factors: the conflation of race, culture and religion, concept of clash of civilizations and religions, all these provides fertile soil for the defamation of religions.
And also on the fight against terrorism, based on defense of national identity and security, it is reduced to religious
dimension.
Note the clause which I emphasized. Who is it that conflates race with religion? If you can't answer that question, re-read the initial post in this series :
Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards, paying close attention to the quote from the report of the African Regional Conference in preparation for the Durban Review.

Unfortunately, insults and intolerance against Islam are being provided intellectual justification by Western scholars
and political lobbies who espouse anti-Islamic agendas, hence lending support to ideological violence against
Muslims. Sophisticated slogans are used to provoke systematic insults against Islam. This phenomenon reflects
the Islarnophobia which afflicts segments of western society.
This paragraph inverts cause and effect. We developed anti-Islamic agendas precisely because of Islam's anti-Christian & anti-western doctrines, agendas & actions. Our accurate descriptions of Islamic doctrines & practices are labled insults and intolerance. Accurate and well documented descriptions of Islamic sanctification & mandate of genocidal conquest and terrorism are labled "insults" and "intolerance".
The last paragraph of the introduction is severely overloaded by implicit reference to the documents listed and linked above.
Lack of action to prevent the reprinting of blasphemous caricatures, and indifference in airing the inflammatory documentary against the holy Quran will be perceived as manifestation of insincerity towards the principles and objectives of various efforts within the United Nations system aiming at promoting understanding and respect among cultures and civilizations. [Links added.]
It should now be clear to you that the Iranian agenda includes criminalizing criticism of Islam, specifically the Danish Cartoons and Geert Wilders' Fitna.

The cartoons depict Muhammad as a terrorist, which, by his own admission, he was. He never threw a bomb, because explosives were invented after he died. he used the primitive weaponry available in the seventh century to terrorize his victims with ruthless slaughter. If you do not comprehend this fact, open your Qur'an to 33:26, 59:2 & 59:13 and read them carefully.

Fitna demonstrates the obvious connection between Islamic doctrine enshrined in the Qur'an. This fact is documented in another blog post. It is extremely unlikely that anyone else will reveal to you the source of Islam's intense determination to criminalize criticism of itself. I will: It comes from Islamic law, codified in Reliance of the Traveller. Book O, which treats of "Justice", includes an outline of the conditions imposed upon dhimmis, who were "people of the book" subjugated by Muslims under a "treaty of protection". Chapter 11.10 lists five acts which violate the treaty of protection and subject the dhimmi to immediate execution. Here is the fifth item in that list.

-5- or mentions something impermissible about Allah, the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), or Islam.

The perceptive reader will want to know what is impermissible to mention. O8.7 lists 20 items which entail apostasy, and describes the list as nearly endless. Here are a few relevant items from that list.

-1- to prostrate to an idol, whether sarcastically, out of mere contrariness, or in actual conviction, like that of someone who believes the Creator to be something that has originated in time. Like idols in this respect are the sun or moon, and like prostration is bowing to other than Allah, if one intends reverence towards it like the reverence due to Allah;

-2- to intend to commit unbelief, even if in the future. And like this intention is hesitating whether to do so or not: one thereby immediately commits unbelief;

-3- to speak words that imply unbelief such as ``Allah is the third of three,'' or ``I am Allah''-unless one's tongue has run away with one, or one is quoting another, or is one of the friends of Allah Most High (wali, def: w33) in a spiritually intoxicated state of total oblivion (A: friend of Allah or not, someone totally oblivious is as if insane, and is not held legally responsible (dis: k13.1(O:) ) ), for these latter do not entail unbelief;

-4- to revile Allah or His messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace);

-5- to deny the existence of Allah, His beginingless eternality, His endless eternality, or to deny any of His attributes which the consensus of Muslims ascribes to Him (dis: v1);

-6- to be sarcastic about Allah's name, His command, His interdiction, His promise, or His threat;

-7- to deny any verse of the Koran or anything which by scholarly consensus (def: b7) belongs to it, or to add a verse that does belong to it;

-14- to deny the obligatory character of something which by the consensus of Muslims (ijma`, def: B7) is part of Islam, when it is well known as such, like the prayer (salat) or even one rak'a from one of the five obligatory prayers, if there is no excuse (def: u2.4);

-15- to hold that any of Allah's messengers or prophets are liars, or to deny their being sent;

(n: `Ala' al-din' Abidin adds the following:

-16- to revile the religion of Islam;

-17- to believe that things in themselves or by their own nature have any causal influence independent of the will of Allah;

-18- to deny the existence of angels or jinn (def: w22), or the heavens;

-19- to be sarcastic about any ruling of the Sacred Law;

-20- or to deny that Allah intended the Prophet's message (Allah bless him and give him peace) to be the religion followed by the entire world (dis: w4.3-4) (al-Hadiyya al-`Ala'iyya (y4), 423-24). )

By now you must be wondering about the penalty. Islamic law has that covered, too.

O8.1

When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.

O8.2

In such a case, it is obligatory for the caliph (A: or his representive) to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does, it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed.

Islamic law is clear on its face: any criticism of Allah or his Messenger gets you killed. The Ad Hoc Committee On Complementary Standards is only the latest tool developed in pursuit of that objective.

Under the heading of "Legal Aspects", Iran describes the cartoons & Fitna as "inconsistent with the spirit of the UN Charter" and various resolutions.

The elimination of discrimination and the protection against Intolerance is in part a matter of legal protection.

They jabber on with quotes about universal freedom, equality and dignity, without finding anything relevant to the matter at hand. The next paragraph is mired in excrement.

Crucially, according to- article 20, paragraph.2 of the ICCPR, " any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law" This provision represents a clear limitation to-the night to fee speech which according to article 19 of the ICCPR carries with it special duties and responsibilities.

The cartoons do not advocate hatred, nor do they incite discrimination, hostility or violence. The same is true of Fitna. Few will perceive the irony in Islam's specious assertion: it is their own scripture, tradition & jurisprudence which advocates hatred and incites violence. If Article 20 were to be enforced, the Qur'an, hadith & Shari'ah would be banned as incitement to violence!

The committee on civil and Political Rights in its general comment 11 provided that these required prohibitions are fully compatible with the right to freedom of expression as contained in Article 19, the exercise of which carries with it special duties and responsibilities. This is clear indication that human rights instruments recognize provisions against incitement to religions hatred as being a completely legitimate- safeguard against the abuse of the right to free speech.

Iran is asserting that accurately describing Allah's genocidal Jihad imperatives which are found in Surahs Al-Anfal & At-Taubah and confirmed in Sahih Bukhari's Books of Jihad, Khumus & Expedition and codified in Reliance of the Traveller Book O, Chapter 9, Paragraphs 8 & 9 must be legally prohibited as "incitement to religious hatred". Islamic obedience to those imperatives has resulted in 270*106 premature deaths in the last 1400 years but we must be prevented, by judicial penalties, from mentioning it.

Identifying the enemy and describing his doctrines is characterized as an abuse of free speech. This is nothing less than the aggressor's program for depriving us of the ability to defend ourselves against his aggression.

The last section of the submission is under the heading of Programme of Action.

In sum, the right to freedom of expression should be exercised with the responsibilities and limitations as prescribed by law. The international community should initiate a global dialogue to promote a culture of tolerance and peace based on respect for human rights and cultural diversity and urges states, NGOs, religious bodies and media to support and promote such a dialogue. Developing the human rights language to address emerging issues such as defamation of religions was an important step forward that is of interest not only to Muslims but to all the internatioual community.

Our freedom of expression must not include mention of Islam's aggressive doctrines & practices: conquest, genocide & terrorism. A culture of tolerance and peace means being led, dumb like sheep, to the slaughter.

Islamic Republic of Iran urges the Ad hoc Committee on the elaboration of complementary standards to call upon the States to stop the publication of blasphemous caricatures, Elms and media as well as the campaigns for anti-Islamic regulations to take all possible legal and administrative measures to prevent continuation of these deliberate offensive acts, which impinge greatly on the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion of the followers of Islam.

They want to add wording to ICERD to criminalize every criticism of Islam. How in Hell does anything we write or say impinge on the liberty of Muslims? Why must they be allowed to continue in the arrogant assumption that they have a divine right and mission to kill, enslave, rape, pillage & plunder us?

Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards

Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards

What does that title tell us? Only that a special purpose committee was instituted. "Complementary Standards" tells us nothing about its purpose. Complementary to what? What standards might the committee complete?

We have only a high sounding title, for a committee instituted by men with lofty titles and low morals: the United Nations Human Rights Council.
Ms. Navanethem Pillay, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights has a hint for us.
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.
They are talking about adding a protocol to the International Convention for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. The protocol would be enforceable international law, binding on the signatories. You probably overlooked some key words.
  • contemporary aspects of racism.
What the Hell does that mean? It does not mean hating people because of their skin color, physiognomy or supposed inferior culture.
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;
Islamophobia implies irrational fear and loathing. Considering Islam's historical record of 270*106 innocent victims, there is nothing irrational about fearing or loathing Islam.

Islam is a war cult, not a race. It was contrived by an Arab, but it has enslaved people of several races, and due to their large population base and high rate of reproduction, Asian Muslims now outnumber Arab Muslims.

The next post in this series will examine the suggestions submitted to the committee by The Islamic Republic of Iran.

Thursday, July 30, 2009

Rodan is Wrong

Irrationality reared its ugly head at Blogocracy.

Initially, Rodan opined that Islam should be banned because "It is not only Muslim immigrants that are a threat.". Subsequently, he retracts hes call for banning Islam on the basis of a reader comment from Lance. Lance argued that banning Islam would lead to banning Christianity.
ban islam and christianity and judiasm follow.

1st amendment applies or it doesn’t.

it doesn’t allow them to commit terrorism, but they can still face east and pray to a black rock if they wish.

remember that there are many who come here to escape oppression.

I will take on Rodan first. Involvement by native converts and Muslims born here is irrelevant to the question of whether Islam should be banned. Islam should be banned or tolerated based on its mission, doctrines and practices, not the identity of its adherents.

Lance's argument that banning Islam implies banning religions is illogical because there is good cause for banning Islam. Unlike Judiasm & Christianity, Islam has a mercenary mission and militant methods. It issues a mandatory license to kill, enslave, rape, pillage & plunder. Jihad is "ordained for Muslims". That means Jihad is mandatory, not optional. Jihad is their "original religion", abandoning it in favor of productive pursuits subjects them to a curse from Allah.The Bible neither issues an open license to kill nor threatens adherents with Hellfire for failing to engage in offensive conquest.

Islam's mercenary mission, evident in 8:1, 8:41, 8:67 & 48:20, its mandate to global conquest in 8:39, 9:29 & 9:123, its mandate to cast terror in 8:12 and its mandate to genocide in 8:67 & 47:4 make Islam absolutely intolerable. Those Qur'an verses have no functional equivalent in the Bible.

The free exercise clause prevents Congress from passing laws abridging the free exercise of religion. Jihad, terrorism & genocide are intrinsic sacraments of Islam; they can not be prohibited by law unless the first amendment is reinterpreted or amended. Islam is inseverable; Jihad can not be separated from Iman, Salat & Zakat.

It is true that many Muslims fled to America and Europe to escape from prosecution by the "hypocrites" whose tyrannical regimes they sought to overthrow and supplant with their own corrupt theocracy. That does nothing to change the fact that Islam is a war cult which wears a thin veil of religion as a camouflage and troop motivator.

Saturday, July 25, 2009

Inter Religious Idiocy

JTA (Article by Eric Fingerhut July 23, 2009)

The Foundation for Ethnic Understanding sponsored a conference of Rabbis & Imams to promote ethnic understanding. At the end of the four days of meetings, including visits to New York City and Washington D.C. , a joint statement was issued. Selected excerpts are reproduced below. [Emphasis added.]

  • We should explore together the commonalities in our faiths and traditions. We affirm here that we respect the sanctity of each other’s houses of worship and will stand together in case of an assault on either a mosque or a synagogue. We also stand in solidarity with each other in affirming that both Islamophobia and anti-Semitism are wrong and unacceptable, and we will fight against them together. Bigotry against any Jew or any Muslim is an attack on all Muslims and all Jews. In addition we are united in support of human rights for all peoples.

  • We denounce all forms of violence in the name of any religion or ideology and will do everything we can to prevent the spread of extremism in the name of any faith—including our own.

  • We feel sorrow and pain over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the great suffering it has brought to both peoples involved in that conflict. We pray for a non-violent resolution of that conflict that will allow both Palestinians and Israelis to live with dignity in peace and security. We have resolved to work together to strengthen Muslim-Jewish ties in our own countries and around the world. We will not allow future eruptions of violence in the Middle East to derail our efforts to strengthen Jewish-Muslim ties in Europe and North America because we understand that good Muslim-Jewish relations are necessary for the health of our own communities and our societies.
The condemnation of "Islamophobia" stands out as a token of idiocy or insincerity. Fear and loathing of Islam is not irrational, since 270*106 innocent people have been slaughtered by Islam in the last 1400 years. Bigotry against Jews is founded in the Qur'an, including 1:7, 2:76, 3:64-65, 4:47, 9:30 & 98:6.

Denunciation of "all forms of violence in the name of any religion" stands out as a clear case of al-taqeyya. Jihad against Jews is mandated by Surah At-Taubah 29. Renouncing Jihad is an act of Apostasy punishable by death under Shari'ah. Refer to Reliance of the Traveller, O8.7-7.

Considering the Qur'anic mandate to make war upon Jews and the hadith which prescribes the final genocide as a prerequisite for Judgment Day, the prayer for non-violent resolution of the attempted reconquest of Israel rings hollow.

Saturday, July 18, 2009

What Will Jesus Do?

A 6th century mosaic of :en:Jesus at Church Sa...
Image via Wikipedia

Muslims assert that they revere Jesus Christ as a Prophet. Here is an example from islamicity.

Muslims respect and revere Jesus, and await his Second Coming. They consider him one of the greatest of God's messengers to mankind. A Muslim never refers to him simply as 'Jesus', but always adds the phrase 'upon him be peace'. The Quran confirms his virgin birth (a chapter of the Quran is entitled 'Mary'), and Mary is considered the purest woman in all creation.

So Christians and Muslims share common ground as monotheistic faiths holding Jesus Christ in high esteem. Most readers are aware of the Christian Jesus, but unaware of the Islamic concept of Jesus. Allah's book, the Qur'an, will enlighten us. The following quotes are from the Hilali & Khan translation, linked to a table of ten parallel translations. [Emphasis added.]

3:59 Verily, the likeness of 'Iesa (Jesus) before Allah is the likeness of Adam. He created him from dust, then (He) said to him: "Be!" - and he was.

3:61 Then whoever disputes with you concerning him ['Iesa (Jesus)] after (all this) knowledge that has come to you, [i.e. 'Iesa (Jesus)] being a slave of Allah, and having no share in Divinity)...

4:157-158 And because of their saying (in boast), "We killed Messiah 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), the Messenger of Allah," - but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but the resemblance of 'Iesa (Jesus) was put over another man (and they killed that man), and those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no (certain) knowledge, they follow nothing but conjecture. For surely; they killed him not [i.e. 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) ]: But Allah raised him ['Iesa (Jesus)] up (with his body and soul) unto Himself (and he is in the heavens). And Allah is Ever All­Powerful, All­Wise.

4:159 ...And there is none of the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), but must believe in him ['Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), as only a Messenger of Allah and a human being]...

23:91 . No son (or offspring or children) did Allah beget, nor is there any ilah (god) along with Him; ...

Islamic scripture denies Christ's divinity, paternity, crucifixion, death & resurrection. Why do Muslims anticipate the second coming? Our first hint comes from an obscure, off topic reference in Shari'ah, Islamic law codified in Reliance of the Traveller. I have added emphasis to the crucial text.

O9.8: The Objectives of Jihad

The caliph (o25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o11.4) -which is the significance of their paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions) (O: and the war continues) until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the word of Allah Most High,

"Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and His messenger have forbidden-who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book-until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled" (Koran 9.29),

the time and place for which is before the final descent of Jesus (upon whom be peace). After his final coming, nothing but Islam will be accepted from them, for taking the poll tax is only effective until Jesus' descent (upon him and our Prophet be peace), which is the divinely revealed law of Muhammad. The coming of Jesus does not entail a separate divinely revealed law, for he will rule by the law of Muhammad. As for the Prophet's saying (Allah bless him and give him peace),

"I am the last, there will be no prophet after me,"

this does not contradict the final coming of Jesus (upon whom be peace), since he will not rule according to the Evangel, but as a follower of our Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) ).

We learn from Shari'ah that the caliph is obligated to extend dawa to people having scriptural religions and to make war upon them if they reject Islam. We learn that he can accept extortion payments from them in lieu of conversion, but only until the second coming, after which Jizya will not be accepted. After Jesus returns, Jews, Christians & Zoroastrians must convert or die; only Islam will be accepted from them.

We learn that Jesus will be a successor to Muhammad and that he will rule by the Qur'an, not the Bible. It follows that he must make war upon Jews & Christians as all caliphs must do. For amplification we turn to one of the prophetic hadith of Muhammad which bears directly on this issue. [Emphasis added.]

Sunan Abu Dawud Book 37, Number 4310:

Narrated AbuHurayrah:

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

Jesus will fight the people for the cause of Islam, just as Islamic law requires. Breaking the cross is an obvious reference to destroying Christianity. Killing swine is a metaphor for genocide of the remaining Christians. "As cited in Ibn Abbas: The apes are Jews, the keepers of the Sabbath; while the swine are the Christian infidels of the communion of Jesus."

Islamic prophesy depicts Jesus Christ as a genocidal warmonger, not the prince of peace. But thats not all, Islamic exegeses informs us that Jesus will lead the Muslims in exterminating the Jews. This quote is from Ibn Kathir's Tafsir of 7:167 : Eternal Humiliation Placed on the Jews.

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

Now you know what Jesus will do: he will wage war against and kill Christians & Jews and rule the world as caliph, a successor of and subordinate to Muhammad. Jesus Christ: genocidal warmonger. So much for the "great religion of peace". So much for "common ground" & "inter religious dialogue". We have been lied to: Islam is a war cult, not a religion of peace and it co-opts Jesus Christ as a genocidal warlord. Now that you know, what will you do about it? Will you roll over and return to sleep or will you share your new found knowledge and seek more? Copy and paste this blog post into emails to your family, friends and associates. Send a copy to the Pastor of your church or Rabbi of your synagogue. Follow the links and read the Qur'an, hadith, tafsir & Shari'ah.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Saturday, July 11, 2009

Islam in Action


The video embedded here was recorded at a recent Islamic Festival held in Dearborn, Michigan. In it you will see and hear Muslims assaulting and attempting to intimidate a Christian. Observe their expressions and gestures; hear their words and experience Islamic supremacism, triumphalism and arrogance. As their numbers increase, their attitude will intensify. The video was posted to You Tube by Act! For America.


The video has a ten minute run time and is 23MB. If, like me, you are limited to a dial- up cconnection, you will need to download it. For that you will need Firefox or Flock, with DWHelper; you will also need Irfanview to play the flv file.

The video centers around the Islamic response to Christians who wanted to discuss a pamphlet distributed by Muslims at a booth in the festival. The pamphlet's title was "Uprooting the Forces of Evil:: Islam's War on Terrorism". The pamphlet is available on the web as a pdf file at http://www.islaam.ca/downloads/islamswaronterror.pdf.

A critical examination of the pamphlet will explain their reluctance to have a Dialogue about it. The pamphlet is in question/answer format.
  • Are these indiscriminate bombings, such as what occurred in the US, London and Madrid, Islamically justifiable?
    • Islam unequivocally prohibits the likes of these horrendous acts and does not condone this awful behavior. Look at what Allah says, in the Quran, about those who kill innocent people.
      • "It would be as if he killed the whole of mankind; and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the whole of mankind."(Al-Ma'idah: 32)
    • Prophet Muhammad- may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him-s stressed the prohibition of killing women and children on many occasions, even at times of war:
      • Abu Bakr; the Prophet's closest disciple said :Do not kill women or children or a senile person, do not cut down fruit-bearing trees and do not destroy an inhabited place."
    • Therefore, this behavior can never be justified in any way, shape or form.
The polemicist quotes 5:32, but completely ignores the verse which follows it, which has a bearing upon the definition of innocent.
5:33. The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter.
I have added emphasis to the most critical parts of that ayeh. We must focus our attention upon one key phrase: wage war against Allah; what does it mean?
The answer is contained in Ibn Kathir's Tafsir:
[...]`Wage war' mentioned here means, oppose and contradict, and it includes disbelief, blocking roads and spreading fear in the fairways. [...]
Waging war against Allah and his Messnger consists of opposing and contradicting Islam and it includes three parallel sub elements:
  1. disbelief
  2. blocking roads
  3. spreading fear.
If you do not believe in Allah, and fully submit to him, then you are not innocent; you may be killed with impunity because you are at war against Allah and his Messenger.

Whenever a Muslim speaks or writes about the prohibition of killing innocent people, he practices kitman: lying by omission. In so doing, he relies upon your assumption that he shares your definition of innocent. He does not; In the Muslim world view, only Muslims are innocent.

By the same token, we are expected to assume that the prohibition on killing women and children is based upon moral principles. It is not! The prohibition is economic, not moral. Kuffar women and children are economic assets for their captors. Examine Allah's word..
33:26. And those of the people of the Scripture who backed them (the disbelievers) Allâh brought them down from their forts and cast terror into their hearts, (so that) a group (of them) you killed, and a group (of them) you made captives.
Note the italicized phrase: whom did they make captives? Once again, the answer is provided by Ibn Kathir.
[...]Those who were killed were their warriors, and the prisoners were their children and women.[...]
What is the disposition of captive women and children? We learn from Shari'ah that they become slaves by reason of capture. Examine this quote from Reliance of the Traveller.

O9.13 When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman's previous marriage is immediately annulled.

This hadith will clarify the matter for you; it should also fill you with disgust.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 459:

Narrated Ibn Muhairiz:

I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e. coitus interruptus). Abu Said said, "We went out with Allah's Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interrupt us, we said, 'How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah's Apostle who is present among us?" We asked (him) about it and he said, 'It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist."

They received captives. Captive women were distributed as part of the spoils. Moe gave his companions permission to rape those women.