The High Commissioner’s Big Lie Part 2

A press release from Eye on the UN brought a new UN disinformation campaign to light: Anti-racism conference outcome document – what it actually says. [All font attributes in the quotations were added by the author for emphasis and clarity. All links within the quotations, with the exception of the quote from Wikipedia, were added by the author.]

Concerning “defamation of religion”, there were concerns that the outcome document would introduce such a concept and threaten freedom of expression. The document does no such thing.

It unequivocally reaffirms the positive role of freedom of expression in the fight against racism, while also deploring derogatory stereotyping and stigmatization of people based on their religion or belief, as manifested in Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, Christianophobia and anti-Arabism.

The outcome document also launches a process to examine how the prohibition of incitement to hatred, a well-established concept as reflected in Article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, has been implemented in various parts of the world.

Prohibition of incitement to hatred & violence would require the banning of Islam’s canon of scripture, tradition & Jurisprudence.Since the UN and its appendant bodies are dominated by the OIC and its dhimmis & allies, such a ban will never happen.

The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) is to organize a series of expert workshops on the legislative patterns, judicial practices and national policies in the different regions of the world on the subject in order to assess the level of implementation of the prohibition of incitement.

It is true that “defamation of religion” does not occur in the text of the outcome document. But the demon is in the details.

12. Deplores the global rise and number of incidents of racial or religious intolerance and violence, including Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, Christianophobia and anti-Arabism manifested in particular by the derogatory stereotyping and stigmatization of persons based on their religion or belief; and in this regard urges all the UN Member States to implement paragraph 150 of the DDPA;

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
;

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

This statement: “advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement”, is not so narrowly construed as we are expected to assume. This fatal fact is established by the spew from the Secretary General in his irresponsible condemnation of Fitna, the short subject by Dutch M.P., Geert Wilders. Fitna juxtaposes verses of the Qur’an with their real world application from Kutbah to resulting riots. The video quotes Islam’s canon of scripture along with excerpts from video recordings of Kutbah and images of resulting riots. The only expressions of hatred or incitement contained therein are those of Islam’s demon and his acolytes. Read what Ban Ki-Moon said about it.

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, accurate quotation of the Qur’an is hate speech; accurately depicting Muslim clerics screaming for blood is incitement to violence, not protected by freedom of expression.

The draft of October 9 ’08 contained three insertions of “defamation of religion”. While the phrase was deleted, the intention of the authors remains unchanged.

The outcome document contains 79 references to “racism”. We must not ignore the implied meaning of that word. The following quote is from the 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;

The emphasized phrase conflates objections to Islam’s supremacism, triumphalism, aggression, genocide & terrorism with racism.

30. Welcomes the important role played by the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, and all other relevant special procedures and mechanisms in the fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and calls on States to cooperate fully with these mechanisms;

A/HRC/7/19, the report submitted by Mr. Doudou Diène, Special Rapporteur 02/20/08 contains 7 references to “Islamophobia”

Efforts to combat racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance are encountering a number of serious major challenges manifested by the following worrying trends, details of which are given in this report: erosion of the political will to combat racism and xenophobia, as shown by the non-implementation of the Durban Programme of Action; the resurgence of racist and xenophobic violence; the growing political trivialization of racism and xenophobia, demonstrated by the spread of racist and xenophobic political platforms and by their implementation through government alliances with democratic parties; the ideological, scientific and intellectual legitimization of racist and xenophobic discourse and rhetoric, which favours an ethnic or racial interpretation of social, economic and political problems and immigration; the general increase in manifestations of racial and religious hatred, and also religious intolerance, reflected in particular in manifestations of anti-Semitism and Christianophobia and, more especially, Islamophobia; and the increasing importance in identity constructs of a rejection of
diversity and resistance to the process of multiculturalization of societies. The Special Rapporteur devotes a chapter to discrimination based on caste, which he considers to be implicit in his mandate.

To reverse these worrying trends, the Special Rapporteur is continuing to promote, in all his activities, the development of a dual strategy: political and legal, on the one hand, aiming to arouse and strengthen the political will of Governments to combat racism and xenophobia and enabling States to acquire the legal and administrative instruments for this purpose, in line with the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action; and cultural, intellectual and ethical, on the other hand, targeting the root causes of those trends, in particular the value systems which legitimize them, the identity constructs – including the writing and teaching of history – which support them, and the rejection of diversity and multiculturalism which sustains them.

6. The growth of incitement to racial and religious hatred and the resurgence of manifestations of anti-Semitism, Christianophobia and, more particularly, Islamophobia are other particularly worrying trends. They can be attributed to the following: conflation of race, culture and religion; intellectual and ideological questioning of religion; the imbalance between the defence of secularism and respect for freedom of religion; and the supervisory and security-based approach to the practice and teaching of Islam. A particularly worrying element resulting from these developments is the selective and political interpretation of human rights and fundamental freedoms, manifested inter alia by the ideological pre-eminence of freedom of expression over the other freedoms, restrictions and limitations embodied in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

54. Throughout his term of office, the Special Rapporteur has highlighted one of the central causes of the resurgence of racism and its increasing complexity: the conflation of racial, cultural and religious factors. He has consequently paid special attention to the increase in anti-Semitism, Islamophobia and Christianophobia, and hostility to other spiritual and religious traditions. His most recent report on combating defamation of religions,11 which was submitted to the Human Rights Council at its sixth session, must be seen in the context of his earlier reports to the Commission on Human Rights on the situation of Muslim and Arab peoples in various parts of the world, in which he stressed the violence and attacks targeted on their places of worship,
cultural centres, businesses and property following the events of 11 September 2001.12 His report entitled “Defamation of religions and global efforts to combat racism: anti-Semitism, Christianophobia and Islamophobia”13 confirms this worrying trend.

One quote stands out like a sore toe; lets face it directly.

A particularly worrying element resulting from these developments is the selective and political interpretation of human rights and fundamental freedoms, manifested inter alia by the ideological pre-eminence of freedom of expression over the other freedoms, restrictions and limitations embodied in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Doudou Diène let the snake out of the bag. The authors welcome his important role. The sentence quoted above crystallizes the central concept of the document. Contrary to the dishonest statement of High Commissioner Navi Pillay the outcome document places heavy emphasis on restricting freedom of expression.

28. Reaffirms its call upon States to implement all commitments resulting from international and regional conferences in which they participated, and to formulate national policies and action plans to prevent, combat, and eradicate racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance;

“Racism and related intolerance” means “Islamophobia” which is a code word for any criticism of Islam. The resolution demands legislation to outlaw criticism of Islam.

39. Urges States parties to the Convention to withdraw reservations contrary to the object and purpose of the Convention and to consider withdrawing other reservations; [Link added.]

Wikipedia provides the arcane detail required to comprehend paragraph 39.

The U.S. has attached a reservation to its 1994 ratification of the treaty noting that specifically the treaty’s restrictions on freedom of speech and freedom of assembly were incompatible with the guarantees of such freedoms incorporated into the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.[20][21]

54. Reaffirms the positive role that the exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, as well as the full respect for the freedom to seek, receive and impart information can play in combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, in line with relevant provisions of international human rights law, instruments, norms and standards;

58. Stresses that the right to freedom of opinion and expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic, pluralistic society and stresses further the role these rights can play in the fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance worldwide;

Malicious malarkey!!! Malignant maundery!!! Refer to the disgusting execration of Ban Ki-Moon referenced above. The rightful role of freedom of expression in the fight against intolerance is the full and fully documented exposure of Islam’s intrinsic genocidal aggression. Geert Wilders exposed it with Fitna; I documented it with http://snooper.wordpress.com/2008/03/27/fitna-supporting-documentation/ .

56. Calls on States to take effective, tangible and comprehensive measures to prevent, combat and eradicate all forms and manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance;

That is another thinly veiled demand for legislation to criminalize criticism of Islam.

68. Expresses its concern over the rise in recent years of acts of incitement to hatred, which have targeted and severely affected racial and religious communities and persons belonging to racial and religious minorities, whether involving the use of print, audio-visual or electronic media or any other means, and emanating from a variety of sources;

An obvious reference to Fitna and the Danish cartoons.

69. Resolves to, as stipulated in art. 20 of the ICCPR, fully and effectively prohibit any advocacy of national, racial, or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence and implement it through all necessary legislative, policy and judicial measures; [Link added.]

1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.

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

Refer once again to Ban Ki-moon’s despicable defamation of Fitna previously quoted .

99. Calls upon States, in accordance with their human rights obligations, to declare illegal and to prohibit all organizations based on ideas or theories of superiority of one race or group of persons of one colour or ethnic origin, or which attempt to justify or promote national, racial and religious hatred and discrimination in any form, and to adopt immediate and positive measures designed to eradicate all incitement to, or acts of, such discrimination;

That is a thinly veiled attack upon the Belgian & Dutch Freedom parties because they oppose the Islamization of Europe.

121. Commends media organizations that have elaborated voluntary ethical codes of conduct aimed at, inter alia, meeting the goals defined in paragraph 144 of the Durban Programme of Action, and encourages consultations among media professionals through relevant associations and organizations at the national, regional and international levels, with the assistance of OHCHR, with a view to exchanging views on this subject and sharing best practices, taking into account the independence of the media and international human rights standards and norms;

144. Urges States and encourages the private sector to promote the development by the
media, including the print and electronic media, including the Internet
and advertising, taking
into account their independence, through their relevant associations and organizations at the
national, regional and international levels, of a voluntary ethical code of conduct and
self-regulatory measures, and of policies and practices aimed at:
(a) Combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance;
(b) Promoting the fair, balanced and equitable representation of the diversity of their
societies, as well as ensuring that this diversity is reflected among their staff;
(c) Combating the proliferation of ideas of racial superiority, justification of racial
hatred and discrimination
in any form;
(d) Promoting respect, tolerance and understanding among all individuals, peoples,
nations and civilizations, for example through assistance in public awareness-raising campaigns;
(e) Avoiding stereotyping in all its forms, and particularly the promotion of false
images of migrants, including migrant workers, and refugees, in order to prevent the spread of
xenophobic sentiments among the public
and to encourage the objective and balanced portrayal
of people, events and history;

Paragraph 144 is an obvious demand for self-censorship; note the phrases to which I added emphasis.

134. Takes note of the proposal of the OHCHR, in cooperation with regional stakeholders in all parts of the world, to organize in light of the OHCHR Expert Seminar on the links between art. 19 and 20 of the ICCPR a series of expert workshops to attain a better understanding of the legislative patterns, judicial practices and national policies in the different regions of the world with regard to the concept of incitement to hatred, in order to assess the level of implementation of the prohibition of incitement, as stipulated in article 20 of the ICCPR, without prejudice to the mandate of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Complementary Standards;

What is the big deal about the “Ad Hoc Committee on the Complementary Standards”? Its report, of course. The committee generated a proposed protocol to be added to ICERD. The protocol would criminalize “defamation of religions”, as demanded by the OIC. I am unable at present to find the text of the proposal. These references hint at it. A/HRC/10/L.8, Press Release , Joint NGO Statement.

Remember that Fitna constitutes incitement, according to the Secretary General! The outcome document repeatedly demands criminalization of criticism of Islam. Navi Pillay’s assertion that the outcome document does not threaten freedom of expression is proved to be a malicious, malignant lie, obviously intended to disarm us as we seek to protect and preserve our constitutional rights. If we can not name and accurately describe the doctrines & practices of our enemy then, in the words of President Washington, …”then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter”.

The United Nations is a contributor to the problem, not part of the solution. Its leaders are liars, men and women with lofty titles and low morals. To Hell with it and with them! Instead of seeking a seat on the Orwellian UNHRC, the U.S.A. should withdraw from the UN and expel it and its appendant bodies from our territory.

Advertisements

The Censorship Protocol

This is what the IHEU is warning about in their press release, as the second of three listed threats to liberty.

Call upon all governments to resist the efforts of the “Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards” to alter the ICERD;.

This draft complementary international standards in the fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance has been prepared for the implementation of paragraph 199 of the Program of Action(A/CONF.189/12).

199. Recommends 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;

Article 4 of the proposed protocol to ICERD is titled: Prohibition of Incitement to Racial Hatred.
This article contains several notable provisions.

  1. States Parties condemn all propaganda, practice or organization to justify or encourage any form of hatred or discrimination against persons belonging to groups such as religious groups, refugees, asylum seekers, people displaced, stateless persons, migrants and migrant workers, descent-based communities such as people of African descent, indigenous peoples, minorities and people under foreign occupation.
  2. States Parties undertake to adopt immediate and positive measures designed to eradicate all incitement to such hatred or discrimination, including:
  1. to declare an offense punishable by law all dissemination of ideas to such discrimination or hatred, as well as all acts of violence or incitement to such acts directed against persons belonging to particular groups;
  2. to declare illegal and prohibit organizations and propaganda activities organized and any other type of propaganda which incites hatred or discrimination or who encourages, and to declare punishable by law the involvement in such organizations or activities;
  3. not permit public authorities, national or local, to incite hatred or discrimination;
  4. not to allow political parties to incite hatred or discrimination.
  5. to strengthen their laws or take the legal provisions necessary to prohibit and punish racist and xenophobic platforms and discourage by a democratic debate vigilant the integration of political parties promoting these platforms in Government to legitimise their implementation alliances.

This protocol to ICERD would become International law, binding on signatories, and a provision in Article 17 prohibits reservations. We need a definition of terms:

  • justify or encourage any form of hatred or discrimination
  • incites hatred
  • racist and xenophobic

Here is a clue from Article 6.

The fundamental characteristic of all the events to certain religions and descriditer to insult people or groups who share the religion, commonly called “defamation of religions” and all the fear and religious discrimination is inciting racial hatred For religious and address the issue of defamation of religions in a universal, it is essential to bring this discussion to the international instruments on human rights.

According to that, anyone who says or writes anything negative about Islam incites racial hatred. Is that clear yet? Examine what U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said about Geert Wilders’ 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.”[Reuters]

Geert Wilders quoted the Qur’an and displayed images of rabble rousing Imams and their followers, along with some of the results of their preaching. Ban Ki-moon says that constitutes hate speech and incitement to violence.

Masood Khan quoted Ban Ki-Moon’s representative to the Alliance of Civilizations as declaring Fitna to be ” a deliberate incitement to discrimination, violence and hatred on grounds of religion, aimed at provoking and promoting social unrest”. [Masood Khan’s statement of 04/01/08]

If we accurately describe Islam’s doctrines & practices, quoting its canon of scripture, tradition & jurisprudence, we are automatically convicted of hate speech; inciting violence. This is part of an Orwellian campaign to dis-arm us, to render us incapable of warning against Islamic aggression.

This protocol would outlaw two American and two European political parties for their anti-Islam platforms. Muhammad, claimed to be the best and greatest of men, worthy of emulation as a role model was a murderer, pedophile & terrorist. For genuine hate speech and incitement to violence, read the Qur’an, don’t stop there, read the next six verses. Is cursing Jews & Christians hateful enough for you? How about genocide? He killed all the men of a Jewish village after they surrendered, then he examined the boys for pubic hair and slaughtered those who had it.

Islam seeks to criminalize its critics because it has no defense against the facts contained in its own canon of scripture, tradition & jurisprudence. Moe had good reason for forbidding his followers to carry the Qur’an into Dar al-Harb: “That is out of fear that the enemy will get hold of it.”

Don’t just sit there waiting for the noose to be placed on your neck. Send an email to your Senators, and to President Obama. Tell them that the proposed protocol is unacceptable. Tell them that you consider support for it to be tantamount to treason. You can send your email through the Federal Officers link at http://www.congress.org/ . Include a link to this blog post in your email so that your Senators can become informed.

Urgent Appeal to NGOs

Dear Readers,

Reproducing blog posts written by others is not my usual habit, I usually do so only when the authors explicitly request it. I make an exception in this extremely important case because of the urgency of the issue and the short time line required for an effective response.

If you are an officer or member of any NGO which speaks out on issues of Liberty, I urge you to give careful and rapid attention to the following appeal from the International Humanist and Ethical Union. Please bring this matter to the immediate attention of the leaders of your organization and exhort them to endorse the appeal immediately.

The statement reproduced below brings two new attacks upon liberty to my attention. I intend to make contact with the author in hopes of receiving links to the documents involved so that I can make them the subject of future blog posts.

As a member of the United American Committee, Act! for America and Center for Vigilant Freedom, I exhort the leaders of those organization to add their official endorsement.

An urgent appeal to Humanist organizations: support freedom of expression, oppose “defamation of religions”

Roy Brown (1)UN Geneva

In conjunction with Freedom House, UN Watch and the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, IHEU is seeking Humanist orgnizations’ support for the statement below, urging all states to reject UN resolutions “combating defamation of religion” – a concept which has no validity in international law. The statement is self explanatory. If your organization is in agreement with the statement, please endorse it on behalf of your organization by emailing me personally at . Please indicate in your reply the full name of your organization (which does not need to be accredited to the UN).

We plan to circulate the statement early next week to delegations at the Human Rights Council, prior to the Council vote on the “defamation of religion” resolution. The deadline for replies is 4pm CET (10am EST) on Tuesday 24 March.

Do not delay! Please add your organization’s voice to this important statement in defence of human rights.

With kind regards

Roy W Brown
IHEU Main Representative, UN Geneva
Immediate Past President of IHEU


Joint NGO Statement on Danger of U.N. “Defamation of Religions” Campaign

We, the undersigned non-governmental organizations,

Deeply concerned by the pervasive and mounting campaign by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) to produce U.N. resolutions, declarations, and world conferences that propagate the concept of “defamation of religions,” a concept having no basis in domestic or international law, and which would alter the very meaning of human rights, which protect individuals from harm, but not beliefs from critical inquiry;

Deeply concerned by the attempt to misuse the U.N. to legitimize anti-blasphemy laws, thereby restricting freedom of religion, freedom of expression, and freedom of the press;

Deeply concerned that “defamation of religions” resolutions may be used in certain countries to silence and intimidate human rights activists, religious dissenters, and other independent voices;

Alarmed by the resolution on “defamation of religions” recently tabled at the current 10th session of the UN Human Rights Council;

Alarmed by the draft resolution on freedom of expression circulated by Egypt, whose amendments seek to restrict, not promote, protections for free speech;

Alarmed by the recently-announced initiative of the U.N. “Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards” to amend the International Convention for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) by adding a protocol on “defamation of religions”;

Alarmed by provisions in the latest draft outcome document of the Durban Review Conference that, through coded language and veiled references, endorse and encourage these subversive and anti-democratic initiatives;

  1. Call upon all governments to oppose the “defamation of religions” resolution currently tabled at the UN Human Rights Council, and the objectionable provisions of the freedom of expression resolution;
  2. Call upon all governments to resist the efforts of the “Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards” to alter the ICERD;
  3. Call upon all governments not to accept or legitimize a Durban Review Conference outcome that directly or indirectly supports the “defamation of religions” campaign at the expense of basic freedoms and individual human rights.

Initial Signatories:

How Censorship Could Become Binding

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights [Dead links removed, emphasis added.]

Article 20

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

Article 51

1. Any State Party to the present Covenant may propose an amendment and file it with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall thereupon communicate any proposed amendments to the States Parties to the present Covenant with a request that they notify him whether they favour a conference of States Parties for the purpose of considering and voting upon the proposals. In the event that at least one third of the States Parties favours such a conference, the Secretary-General shall convene the conference under the auspices of the United Nations. Any amendment adopted by a majority of the States Parties present and voting at the conference shall be submitted to the General Assembly of the United Nations for approval.

2. Amendments shall come into force when they have been approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations and accepted by a two-thirds majority of the States Parties to the present Covenant in accordance with their respective constitutional processes. 3. When amendments come into force, they shall be binding on those States Parties which have accepted them, other States Parties still being bound by the provisions of the present Covenant and any earlier amendment which they have accepted.

Reservation:

(1) That Article 20 does not authorize or require legislation or other action by the United States that would restrict the right of free speech and association protected by the Constitution and laws of the United States.

Understanding:

(1) That the Constitution and laws of the United States guarantee all persons equal protection of the law and provide extensive protections against discrimination. The United States understands distinctions based upon race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or any other status – as those terms are used in Article 2, paragraph 1 and Article 26 – to be permitted when such distinctions are, at minimum, rationally related to a legitimate governmental objective. The United States further understands the prohibition in paragraph 1 of Article 4 upon discrimination, in time of public emergency, based “solely” on the status of race, color, sex, language, religion or social origin not to bar distinctions that may have a disproportionate effect upon persons of a particular status.

Problematic definitions:

  • advocacy of
  • religious hatred
    • constitutes incitement

    In a , I showed how Masooud Khan & Ban Ki-moon define those terms as exemplified by their condemnation of Fitna.
    I have no doubt that anticipation of such egregious abuse of semantics was behind reservation number one cited above. Were it not for the election of an appeaser to the Presidency along with a like minded Senate majority, our liberty might be secure.

    What will happen if Article 20 is amended to conform to the recent & pending resolutions combating defamation of religions & Durban II draft? I expect that President Obama will sign it, the Senate will ratify it, and the Supreme Court will lack the will & resolve necessary to rule it unconstitutional. It would then be possible to persecute American critics of Islam in foreign and international courts, contravening the first amendment.

    Seekers of detailed legal analysis of the issue should refer to Why the U.S. Should Oppose “Defamation of Religions” Resolutions at the United Nations, a Heritage Foundation report and the bibliography in its footnotes.

    Islam = Terrorism??

    This post begins a critical examination of the assertions expressed in and implied by these statements from the current and proposed resolutions combating defamation of religions.

    Also expresses deep concern at attempts to identify Islam with terrorism, violence and human rights violations and emphasizes that equating any religion with terrorism should be rejected and combated by all at all levels;

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

    Is Islam wrongly associated with terrorism? The assertion implies that Islam does not sanction terrorism. An examination of Islam’s canon of scripture & tradition discloses the truth.

    Terror is mentioned in the Qur’an, in both eternal and temporal contexts; only the latter are relevant to this discussion. [Emphasis added.]

    3:151. We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve, because they joined others in worship with Allah, for which He had sent no authority; their abode will be the Fire and how evil is the abode of the Zalimun (polytheists and wrongdoers).

    …Allah next conveys the good news that He will put fear of the Muslims, and feelings of subordination to the Muslims in the hearts of their disbelieving enemies, because of their Kufr and Shirk. … The Prohibition of Obeying the Disbelievers; the Cause of Defeat at Uhud

    7:4. How many a township have We destroyed! As a raid by night, or while they slept at noon, Our terror came unto them.

    (Our torment came upon them by night or while they were taking their midday nap. ) means, Allah’s command, torment and vengeance came over them at night or while taking a nap in the middle of the day. Both of these times are periods of rest and leisure or heedlessness and amusement. Nations that were destroyed

    8:12. (Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels, “Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes.”

    …(I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved.) means, `you — angels — support the believers, strengthen their (battle) front against their enemies, thus, implementing My command to you. I will cast fear, disgrace and humiliation over those who defied My command and denied My Messenger, (so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes.) strike them on their foreheads to tear them apart and over the necks to cut them off, and cut off their limbs, hands and feet….Allah commands the Angels to fight and support the Believers

    8:60. Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of God and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom God doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of God, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly.

    33:26. And those of the people of the Scripture who backed them (the disbelievers) Allah brought them down from their forts and cast terror into their hearts, (so that) a group (of them) you killed, and a group (of them) you made captives.

    (and cast terror into their hearts;) means fear, because they had supported the idolators in their war against the Messenger of Allah and the one who knows is not like the one who does not know. They had terrified the Muslims and intended to kill them so as to gain earthly power, but their plans backfired; the idolators ran away and the believers were victorious while the disbelievers were losers; where they had aimed for glory, they were humiliated. The Campaign against Banu Qurayzah

    59:2. He it is Who drove out the disbelievers among the people of the Scripture (i.e. the Jews of the tribe of Bani An-Nadir) from their homes at the first gathering. You did not think that they would get out. And they thought that their fortresses would defend them from Allah! But Allah’s (Torment) reached them from a place whereof they expected it not, and He cast terror into their hearts, so that they destroyed their own dwellings with their own hands and the hands of the believers. Then take admonition, O you with eyes (to see).

    …Therefore, Allah sent His torment down on them; it can never be averted, and His appointed destiny touched them; it can never be resisted. The Prophet forced them to evacuate and abandon their fortified forts that Muslims did not think they would ever control. …Then take admonition, O you with eyes.) meaning, “Contemplate the end of those who defied Allah’s command, contradicted His Messenger and denied His Book. See how Allah’s humiliating torment struck them in this life, as well as, the painful torment that Allah has reserved for them in the Hereafter.”… The End that Bani An-Nadir suffered

    59:13. Of a truth ye are stronger (than they) because of the terror in their hearts, (sent) by God. This is because they are men devoid of understanding.

    …(Verily, you are more fearful in their breasts than Allah.) meaning, the hypocrites fear you more than they fear Allah, as He says; (Behold! a section of them fear men as they fear Allah or even more.)… The False Promise of Support the Hypocrites gave to the Jews

    Allah said that he would cast terror. He commanded Muslims to participate in it. He cast terror so that two Jewish tribes were conquered, their defenders killed & survivors enslaved. The second cited instance is established as a warning to future victims. That concept is reinforced by another ayeh.

    8:57. So if you gain the mastery over them in war, punish them severely in order to disperse those who are behind them, so that they may learn a lesson.

    …(then disperse those who are behind them,) by severely punishing ﴿the captured people﴾ according to Ibn `Abbas, Al-Hasan Al-Basri, Ad-Dahhak, As-Suddi, `Ata’ Al-Khurasani and Ibn `Uyaynah. This Ayah commands punishing them harshly and inflicting casualties on them. This way, other enemies, Arabs and non-Arabs, will be afraid and take a lesson from their end,… Striking Hard against Those Who disbelieve and break the Covenants

    By reading those ayat, we discover that Allah sanctified & mandated terrifying those Islam sets out to conquer. In addition to the exemplification in 33:26 & 59:2, two ahadith confirm that Moe was a terrorist.

    Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 7, Number 331:
    Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:
    The Prophet said, “I have been given five things which were not given to any one else before me.
    1. Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month’s journey. …

    Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220:
    Narrated Abu Huraira:

    Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand.” Abu Huraira added: Allah’s Apostle has left the world and now you, people, are bringing out those treasures (i.e. the Prophet did not benefit by them).

    Made victorious by awe / with terror; what could make it more clear? It becomes obvious to all but bigots that the association of Islam with terrorism is well warranted by the evidence.

    Combating Defamation of Religions

    A/63/53 2008 944kb .pdf resolution begins on p.126, 16 item enumerated list, 3 pgs.

    A/HRC/10/L.2
    2009 approx 35kb, Microsoft Word format. 18 item enumerated list.

    Both of these sources have other related documents available, visit them to learn more.
    http://www.unhcr.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/refworld/rwmain http://www.eyeontheun.org/

    [Emphasis added.]

    Concern:
    2008

    1. Expresses deep concern at the negative stereotyping of all religions and manifestations of intolerance and discrimination in matters of religion or belief;
    2. Also expresses deep concern at attempts to identify Islam with terrorism, violence and human rights violations and emphasizes that equating any religion with terrorism should be rejected and combated by all at all levels;
    3. Further expresses deep concern at the intensification of the campaign of defamation of religions and the ethnic and religious profiling of Muslim minorities in the aftermath of the tragic events of 11 September 2001;
    4. Expresses its grave concern at the recent serious instances of deliberate stereotyping of religions, their adherents and sacred persons in the media and by political parties and groups in some societies, and at the associated provocation and political exploitation;

    2009

    Noting with concern that defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general, could lead to social disharmony and violations of human rights, and alarmed at the inaction of some States to combat this burgeoning trend and the resulting discriminatory practices against adherents of certain religions and in this context stressing the need to effectively combat defamation of all religions and incitement to religious hatred in general and against Islam and Muslims in particular,

    7. Expresses deep concern in this respect that Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism and in this regard regrets the laws or administrative measures specifically designed to control and monitor Muslim minorities, thereby stigmatizing them and legitimizing the discrimination they experience;

    Action items:
    2008

    1. Urges States to take actions to prohibit the dissemination, including through political institutions and organizations, of racist and xenophobic ideas and material aimed at any religion or its followers that constitute incitement to racial and religious hatred, hostility or violence;
    2. Also urges States to provide, within their respective legal and constitutional systems, adequate protection against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from the defamation of any religion, to take all possible measures to promote tolerance and respect for all religions and their value systems and to complement legal systems with intellectual and moral strategies to combat religious hatred and intolerance;

    2009

    1. Reaffirms that General Comment 15 of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, in which the Committee stipulated that the prohibition of the dissemination of all ideas based upon racial superiority or hatred is compatible with freedom of opinion and expression, is equally applicable to the question of incitement to religious hatred;
    2. Strongly condemns all manifestations and acts of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance against national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities and migrants and the stereotypes often applied to them, including on the basis of religion or belief, and urges all States to apply and, where required, reinforce existing laws when such xenophobic or intolerant acts, manifestations or expressions occur, in order to deny impunity for those who commit such acts;
    3. Urges all States to provide, within their respective legal and constitutional systems, adequate protection against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general, and to take all possible measures to promote tolerance and respect for all religions and beliefs;
    4. Underscores the need to combat defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general, by strategizing and harmonizing actions at the local, national, regional and international levels through education and awareness building;
    5. Calls upon all States to exert the utmost efforts, in accordance with their national legislation and in conformity with international human rights and humanitarian law, to ensure that religious places, sites, shrines and symbols are fully respected and protected, and to take additional measures in cases where they are vulnerable to desecration or destruction;

    Compare Item #2 from ’08 with #7 from ’09.

    • attempts to identify Islam with terrorism, violence and human rights violations
    • Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism

    The source is easily identifiable.

    • Three, Islam is deliberately equated with terrorism and extremism. Those whipping up frenzy against Muslims use fundamentalism as a pretext but they are really concerned about the growing influence of the educated, modern and moderate Muslims in Europe, and North America who are moving into mainstream politics and businesses. http://missions.itu.int/%7Epakistan/2005_Statements/CHR/stoicpope_21sep06.htm

    In Moral Standing: the Complaint I established the fact that Fitna is one of the chief targets of the continuing campaign to impose censorship. Accurate description of the doctrines & works of Islam is broadly equated with “against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general”. When the Danish cartoons and Fitna were published, did Christian mobs chant threats & execrations? Did they attack embassies, shoot or stab religious workers or burn buildings?

    Pointing out the the Qur’an’s Jihad, genocide & terror enjunctions, confirmed by hadith & codified in Shari’ah, is not hate speech, neither is it racism. As if the remarks of Masood Khan were not enough, examine the condemnation issued by the Secretary General of the U.N.

    “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.” Reuters

    I detailed the hypocrisy of that statement in You’ve Been Mooned! The right of free expression is at stake whenever the U.N. and its appendant bodies are in session. They seek to criminalize the uttering & publishing of information essential to collective recognition of and defense against a barbarian campaign of genocidal conquest which has cost 270 million lives in the last 1400 years.

    Open Letter to the U.S. Senate

    Dear Senators:

    Bloggers who write about critical public issues invest a great deal of time and effort in the hope of effectively sharing vital information with our fellow citizens and elected officials.

    It is frustrating to discover that the fruits of our labor is being passed over with a cursory glance. For example:

    1
    6th March 2009 17:40:51
    0 seconds
    Firefox 3.0
    WinXP
    unknown

    0
    Washington, District Of Columbia, United States
    U.s. Senate Sergeant At Arms (156.33.54.37)
    snooper.wordpress.com/2008/07/11/un-resolutions-revisited-defamation-of-religion/
    snooper.wordpress.com/2008/07/11/un-resolutions-revisited-defamation-of-religion/
    No referring link

    Some Senator or staffer looked and left, apparently without checking any of the dozen links to vital information contained in that post.
    That post is one of the most visited posts on the blog. Because it is outdated, I have updated it with links to more recent posts.

    The General Assembly “Combating Defamation of Religions” resolutions are only one facet of Islam’s campaign to criminalize criticism of Islam. The Human Rights Council has passed similar resolutions, and similar text is included in the Durban II draft document. All of those resolutions share common fallacies & hypocrisy which I expose and document in these blog posts.

    The same conflict continues on another parallel front: “Inter-religious Dialog”. You will find posts about that battle front as well as the UNHRC & Durban II in this list of related posts which I urge you to read.

    In the interest of public education, I will reproduce parts of Book O of Undat as-Salik, which will demonstrate exactly what Islam seeks to accomplish: imposition of its blasphemy laws upon the entire world.

    Note the penalty for apostasy:

    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.

    Emphasis added to make the most important list items stand out: these are acts which will get you decapitated under the rule stated above.

    O8.7: Acts that Entail Leaving Islam

    (O: Among the things that entail apostasy from Islam (may Allah protect us from them) are:

    -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;

    -8- to mockingly say, “I don’t know what faith is”;

    -9- to reply to someone who says, “There is no power or strength save through Allah”; “Your saying `There’s no power or strength, etc,’ won’t save you from hunger”;

    -10- for a tyrant, after an oppressed person says, “This is through the decree of Allah,” to reply, “I act without the decree of Allah”;

    -11- to say that a Muslim is an unbeliever (kafir) (dis: w47) in words that are uninterpretable as merely meaning he is an ingrate towards Allah for divinely given blessings (n: in Arabic, also “kafir”);

    -12- when someone asks to be taught the Testification of Faith (Ar. Shahada, the words, “La ilaha ill Allahu Muhammadun rasulu Llah” (There is no god but Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah) ), and a Muslim refuses to teach him it;

    -13- to describe a Muslim or someone who wants to become a Muslim in terms of unbelief (kufr);

    -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). )

    There are others, for the subject is nearly limitless. May Allah Most High save us and all Muslims from it.)

    The following list applies primarily to Kuffar who have been conquered and submitted to a “treaty of protection” as hinted at in 9:29.

    Chapter O11.0: Non-Muslim Subjects of the Islamic State (Ahl Al-Dhimma)

    O11.1

    A formal agreement of protection is made with citizens who are:

    -1- Jews;

    -2- Christians;

    -3- Zoroastrians;

    -4- Samarians and Sabians, if their religions do not respectively contradict the fundamental bases of Judaism and Christianity;

    -5- and those who adhere to the religion of Abraham or one of the other prophets (upon whom be blessings and peace).

    O11.2

    Such an agreement may not be effected with those who are idol worshippers (dis: o9.9 (n:) ), or those who do not have a Sacred Book or something that could have been a Book.

    (A: Something that could have been a Book refers to those like the Zoroastrians, who have remnants resembling an ancient Book. As for the psuedoscriptures of cults that have appeared since Islam (n: such as the Sikhs, Baha’ is, Mormons, Qadianis, etc.), they neither are nor could be a Book, since the Koran is the final revelation (dis: w4). )

    O11.3

    Such an agreement is only valid when the subject peoples:

    (a) follow the rules of Islam (A: those mentioned below (o11.5) and those involving public behavior and dress, though in acts of worship and their private lives, the subject communities have their own laws, judges, and courts, enforcing the rules of their own religion among themselves);

    (b) and pay the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya).

    O11.4: The Non-Muslim Poll Tax

    The minimum non-Muslim poll tax is one dinar (n: 4.235 grams of gold) per person (A: per year). The maximum is whatever both sides agree upon.

    It is collected with leniency and politeness, as are all debts, and is not levied on women, children, or the insane.

    O11.5

    Such non-Muslim subjects are obliged to comply with Islamic rules that pertain to the safety and indemnity of life, reputation, and property. In addition, they:

    -1- are penalized for committing adultery or theft, thought not for drunkenness;

    -2- are distinguished from Muslims in dress, wearing a wide cloth belt (zunnar);

    -3- are not greeted with “as-Salamu ‘alaykum“;

    -4- must keep to the side of the street;

    -5- may not build higher than or as high as the Muslims’ buildings, though if they acquire a tall house, it is not razed;

    -6- are forbidden to openly display wine or pork, (A: to ring church bells or display crosses,) recite the Torah or Evangel aloud, or make public display of their funerals and feastdays;

    -7- and are forbidden to build new churches.

    O11.6

    They are forbidden to reside in the Hijaz, meaning the area and towns around Mecca, Medina, and Yamama, for more than three days when the caliph allows them to enter there for something they need).

    O11.7

    A non-Muslim may not enter the Meccan Sacred Precinct (Haram) under any circumstances, or enter any other mosque without permission (A: nor may Muslims enter churches without their permission).

    O11.8

    It is obligatory for the caliph (def: o25) to protect those of them who are in Muslim lands just as he would Muslims, and to seek the release of those of them who are captured.

    O11.9

    If non-Muslim subjects of the Islamic state refuse to conform to the rules of Islam, or to pay the non-Muslim poll tax, then their agreement with the state has been violated (dis: o11.11) (A: though if only one of them disobeys, it concerns him alone).

    O11.10

    The agreement is also violated (A: with respect to the offender alone) if the state has stipulated that any of the following things break it, and one of the subjects does so anyway, though if the state has not stipulated that these break the agreement, then they do not; namely, if one of the subject people:

    -1- commits adultery with a Muslim woman or marries her;

    -2- conceals spies of hostile forces;

    -3- leads a Muslim away from Islam;

    -4- kills a Muslim;

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

    This is a link to the resolution passed 12/18/08 http://www.eyeontheun.org/assets/attachments/documents/7201.doc.

    19. Calls upon all States to exert the utmost efforts, in accordance with their national legislation and in conformity with international human rights and humanitarian law, to ensure that religious places, sites, shrines and symbols are fully respected and protected, and to take additional measures in cases where they are vulnerable to desecration or destruction;

    Durban II: (A/CONF.211/PC/WG.2/CRP.2)

    NEW PARA: Calls on States to prohibit by law and adopt necessary policy measures to combat [in accordance with norms of international law] the dissemination of all ideas based on racial superiority or hatred and incitement to hatred; (Racist crimes, hate crimes, urban violence)

    152. Calls on States to combat impunity for acts of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, [and to grant appropriate redress for victims] [by securing access to justice, by granting [and maximizing] [maximum] [fair] [just and adequate] [appropriate] redress for victims];

    159. Urges States to take effective measures to address contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, and to take firm action against negative stereotyping of religions and defamation of religious personalities, holy books, scriptures and symbols;

    160. Calls on States to develop, and where appropriate to incorporate, permissible limitations on the exercise of the right to freedom of expression into national legislation;

    Will you accept Dhimmitude and allow these tyrranical edicts to be imposed upon us by the U.N. and its agencies, abandoning our first amendment rights, or will you rise up and raise Hell?

    U.S. Citizens reading this post are urged to include a link to it in an email to their Representative & Senators by copying and pasting this html code into the email form at http://www.congress.org .

    Open Letter to the U.S. Senate.