Durban II: Revised; Reject it!

From Eye on the UN

Revised version of the technically reviewed text (A/CONF.211/PC/WG.2/CRP.2) submitted by the Chairperson-Rapporteur of the intersessional open-ended working group to continue and finalize the process of negotiations on and drafting of the outcome document (1/28/2009)

Reflecting the status of negotiations in the working group as at 6.00 pm, Friday, 23 January 2009.

Always bear in mind, while reading Durban II & related documents, their manipulation & degradation of our 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;

Our language has been molested!!! anti-Semitism, Christianophobia & Islamophobia = racism ! Christianity & Islam are not races, they each include people of varying racial and geographic backgrounds. Hating a man on the basis of his skin color is irrational. Skin color is not a valid predictor of behavior and it is a genetic trait not under the control of the individual. A believing, practicing Christian, who follows the Golden Rule, is a threat to no one; there is no reason to hate him. A believing, practicing Muslim, is obligated to engage in war against pagans, Jews, Christians & Zoroastrians; our blood and property are not sacred to him, its open season! Fear of Islam is not irrational, it is intended,[3:151] [59:2] and is valid, based upon Islam’s history of violent expansion.

Whenever you read racism and / or related intolerance, substitute criticism of / resistance to Islam.

Readers are urged to sign up for issue updates from Eye on the UN, without which this writer would be unaware of the continuing development of the draft document. Subscribe here.

Key to the Draft Document from the update email.
Ed. Note: Square brackets mean not yet decided. Ad. ref. means ad referendum, or adopted pending agreement on the whole document. A cluster is a group of paragraphs. Para means paragraphs. DDPA is the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action adopted at the first Durban Conference in Durban, South Africa, September 8, 2001. Over the course of the week (January 19-23, 2009), the drafting committee considered only 40% of the document before them and agreed on approximately 20% of the provisions covered.

A/CONF.211/PC/WG.2/CRP.2
{Bold face & font color added for emphasis.}

1. [Emphasizes] the need to [identify/address all forms and] [eradicate all] manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance [in all parts of the world] [as identified in the DDPA, including contemporary manifestations], especially in light of developments and challenges that have occurred since the adoption of the DDPA [with a view to prevent,] and to combat [and eradicate] those manifestations wherever they occur;

The authors want the final document to emphasize the need to identify and eradicate all manifestations of criticism of and resistance to Islam.

3. [Affirms that the [effective implementation of the DDPA can contribute to combating racist and xenophobic trends] [failure to fully implement the DDPA [has contributed to] [would result in] the intensification of worrying racist and xenophobic trends,] including the political instrumentalization and intellectual legitimization of racism as well as racist violence;]

The authors are obviously striking out at the development of anti-Islamic political parties in Europe along with web sites that publish the fatal facts of Islamic doctrine & practice.

4. Notes the continued existence of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, and inequality in all spheres of human life, and non compliance with specific obligations in the promotion and protection of equality at the national, regional and international levels and reaffirms the obligation of States to take action in this respect; [Adopted ad ref.]

5. [Notes that other obstacles hampering progress in the collective struggle against racism and racial discrimination include [first and foremost the absence of political will, the denial of the existence of contemporary racist tendencies,] weak [national] legislation and policies, lack of effective strategies, [lack of political will,] lack of implementation of international legal framework and commitments, impunity on different grounds [ – including [[negative] abuse of] freedom of expression, [counter-terrorism, and national security] [stereotypical association of religion with terrorism and violence by the media and national security forces]– as well as an increase in extreme right wing xenophobic political platforms. Hence the need [arises] to deal with this menace in all its forms and manifestations with all available tools at our disposal];]

6. Underlines that racial discrimination condoned by governmental and state agencies, policies and practices violates human rights and may endanger friendly relations between peoples, cooperation among nations, and international peace and security; [Adopted ad ref.]

Paragraph 4 is an obvious veiled reference to legislation. That concept is reinforced in paragraph 5. Note this combination of expressions.

  • impunity on different grounds
  • [ – including [[negative] abuse of]
  • freedom of expression

The authors are bitching bitterly about the protection afforded to me and my fellow bloggers by the first amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits legislation abridging freedom of political speech. We have an absolute Constitutional right to tell the truth about Islam; its damnable doctrines and practices. We are God blessed well determined to preserve, protect & defend that right, which alone guarantees the continuation of our liberty. They are demanding legislation which would violate the first amendment by denying our right to accurately describe Islam. Accurate description of the enemy in time of war is an absolute necessity. Disproving denial of the enemy’s doctrines and the intentions founded thereon is an unacceptable threat to the war effort, which stands alone between our liberties and Islamic theocratic tyranny.

  • [counter-terrorism, and national security]

The authors are bitching bitterly about our civil & military efforts to protect ourselves against their evil intentions, schemes, plans & attacks with which they hope to injure our persons, destroy our property, ruin our economy and conquer our nation. To Hell with those fiends! Their fabulistic mopery is perfectly unacceptable. They arrogate to themselves the ‘divine’ ‘right and duty’ to attack & conquer us and simultaneously deny our right to defend against their attacks.

  • stereotypical association of religion with terrorism and violence by the media

Snake Feces!!! The assertion is absolutely untrue, false on its face & malicious in its intent. By God, I have proof, derived from Islam’s canon of scripture, tradition, exegeses & jurisprudence and I will submit it. I will extract the core expressions and provide links so that the reader can verify them and read the context. Terrorism & genocidal Jihad are intrinsic sacraments of Islam. Annual attacks against Kuffar are a basic requirement of Shari’ah (Islamic law).

  • aggressive conquest: [Insets are from Ibn Kathir’s Tafsir, underlined phrases are linked.]
  • 8:39 fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world ].
  • 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, [Abdullah Yusuf Ali]
  • 9:29 Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
  • 9:123 Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you
  • Bukhari1.8.387 “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.’ And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us
  • Bukhari4.53.386 Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, has ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah Alone or give Jizya (i.e. tribute); and our Prophet has informed us that our Lord says:– “Whoever amongst us is killed (i.e. martyred), shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen, and whoever amongst us remain alive, shall become your master.”
  • Muslim19.4294 If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them...
  • Abut Dawud23.3455 When you enter into the inah transaction, hold the tails of oxen, are pleased with agriculture, and give up conducting jihad (struggle in the way of Allah). Allah will make disgrace prevail over you, and will not withdraw it until you return to your original religion.
  • The four following citations are from Reliance of the Traveller, the handbook of Shari’ah, a scanned image at Scribid; enter the reference letter & numbers in the search window just above the image of the text.
  • O9.1 The first is when they are in their own countries, in which case jihad (def: o9.8) is a communal obligation, and this is what our author is speaking of when he says, “Jihad is a communal obligation,” meaning upon the Muslims each year.
  • O9.8 The caliph (o-25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians…
  • O9.9 The caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim…
  • O25.9 and if the area has a border adjacent to enemy lands, an eighth duty arises, namely to undertake jihad against enemies, dividing the spoils of battle among combatants, and setting aside fifth (def: o10.3) for deserving recipients.
  • terrorism
    • 3:151 We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve
    • (I was given five things that no other Prophet before me was given. I was aided with fear the distance of one month, the earth was made a Masjid and clean place for me, I was allowed war booty, I was given the Intercession, and Prophets used to be sent to their people, but I was sent to all mankind particularly.)

  • 8:12 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.
  • 33:26 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.
  • 59:2 But Allah’s (Torment) reached them from a place whereof they expected it not, and He cast terror into their hearts,
  • 59:13 Verily, you (believers in the Oneness of Allah – Islamic Monotheism) are more awful as a fear in their (Jews of Bani An-Nadir) breasts than Allah.
  • Bukhari1.7.331 Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month’s journey.
  • Bukhari4.52.220 I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy),
  • genocide
    • 8:67 It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he had made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land.
    • 47:4 So, when you meet (in fight Jihâd in Allâh’s Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives). Thereafter (is the time) either for generosity (i.e. free them without ransom), or ransom (according to what benefits Islâm), until the war lays down its burden. Thus [you are ordered by Allâh to continue in carrying out Jihâd against the disbelievers till they embrace Islâm
    • Abu Dawud38.4390 I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.

    Allah’s word: “fight them”, “fight those who”, “we shall cast terror”, “I will cast terror”, “he cast terror” and Moe’s word: “made me victorious by awe”, “made victorious with terror” clearly prove the assertion of stereotypical association to be malicious malarkey of the worst sort. This proof is confirmed both by exegeses and by Shari’ah. The Order to fight, command to fight, the Caliph makes war; what could possibly be more clear? Islam is evil by design, mercenary & martial; terrorist & genocidal; created for Moe’s emolument & empowerment. Muslims and their allies seek to criminalize the revelation of these fatal facts.

    • racial discrimination condoned by governmental and state agencies, policies and practices
    • may endanger friendly relations between peoples, cooperation among nations, and international peace and security

    Paragraph 6 is a pretext for a threat of war. That is absolutely unacceptable.

    7. Confirms that [recognition of and full] respect for cultural diversity [and multiculturalism] [is an important tool to combat racial discrimination] [contributes to combating racial discrimination] [Stresses that the respect for cultural diversity is a fundamental principle to combat racial discrimination.] [while bearing in mind the significance of national and regional particularities, as well as social, cultural and religious backgrounds, it is reiterated that they may not be invoked to disregard [internationally accepted] [international human rights law] [human rights and fundamental freedoms] [while reiterating that cultural particularities cannot be invoked to [derogate] [disregard] [from] international human rights law];

    8. [Alarmed at the intellectual and political [resistance] [opposition] to [cultural diversity,] multiculturalism, which is one of the root-causes of the resurgence of racist and xenophobic violence, reiterates that rejection of diversity has led to the negation of the very humanity of the immigrant, foreigner and other racial and religious minorities;]

    ALT: Reiterates that the rejection of diversity is one of the root causes of the resurgence of racist and xenophobic violence;

    In paragraphs 7 & 8, we we have a prime example of projection. Islam is supremacist & intolerant. “then their blood and property will be sacred to us” from Bukhari 1.8.387 (quoted above) shows us who denies the humanity of “religious minorities’.

    15. [Deplores the numerous occurrences of [armed] [internal] [and international] conflicts and inter-ethnic and intra-religious or communal violence, including those that appear to be based on tribal lines, which have lead to casualties and killings, torture, massive displacement, rape and destruction of property and infrastructures, war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide;]

    16. Emphasizes that the multiple factors of a situation that might lead to genocide, as defined in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, include the resurgence of systematic discrimination, the prevalence of expressions of hate speech targeting persons belonging to national, ethnic, racial or religious groups,requests States to respect and implement the responsibility to protect in conformity with paragraphs 138 and 139 of the World Summit Outcome [especially in the context of serious and systematic violation of human rights] [especially if they are uttered in the context of an actual or potential outbreak of violence, and serious and systematic violation of human rights] [and ]; [proposal to move second part to section 5]

    Paragraph 15 is supreme hypocrisy. Currently ongoing genocide, such as that in Darfur, arises from Allah’s word & Moe’s example. It is perpetrated by Muslims against those they consider Kuffar or hypocrites. Paragraph 16 carries hypocrisy to a new level of accomplishment.

    • prevalence of expressions of hate speech targeting persons belonging to national, ethnic, racial or religious groups,

    Muslims need not go far to find examples of hate speech, it is as close as the nearest Mosque, where they express their hatred of Jews & Christians five times per day while reciting Surah Al-Fatihah.

    • 1:7. The Way of those on whom You have bestowed Your Grace, not (the way) of those who earned Your Anger (such as the Jews), nor of those who went astray (such as the Christians).
    • 9:29. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
    • 9:30. And the Jews say: ‘Uzair (Ezra) is the son of Allâh, and the Christians say: Messiah is the son of Allâh. That is a saying from their mouths. They imitate the saying of the disbelievers of old. Allâh’s Curse be on them, how they are deluded away from the truth!
    • 9:33. It is He Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islâm), to make it superior over all religions even though the Mushrikûn (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allâh) hate (it).

    (Racial profiling, counter-terrorism)
    22. [Draws attention to the impact of] [Strongly deplores the [overt and covert] discriminatory] counter-terrorism measures [on] [that have led to] the rise of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance [including the practice of racial, ethnic, national and religious profiling;]

    NEW PARA: Also condemns all acts of ethnic, racial or religious profiling and segregation in any society, wherever it may occur, and its concomitant negative impact on the human rights of affected segments of population [and urges States to take resolute action against those responsible both in the public and private sectors]; [proposal to move to section 5].

    NEW PARA: Reaffirms that counter-terrorism strategies should not undermine the protection of human rights and the fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance;

    Both attacks on the World Trade Center, the attack on the Pentagon, the attack on the Madrid rail system and the London subway and bus systems were perpetrated by young Muslim males, not elderly nuns. Terrorism is mainly perpetrated by Muslims. Common sense dictates putting Muslims under close scrutiny. There is one reasonable solution: sent the Muslims home, where they won’t be profiled nor suffer discrimination. And keep them out of our countries so we won’t suffer terrorism. Let them walk or swim instead of flying & sailing. That would reduce the lines at airports considerably and restore security too.

    (Freedom of religion, incitement to religious intolerance, hatred, or violence, defamation of religion, freedom of expression)


    23. Reaffirms the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief and expresses concern over intolerance[s] and discrimination [practiced, misusing religions or belief] [on the grounds] [and] [in the name] of religion or belief;

    Except, of course Dhimmitude & Jizya, imposed upon conquered Jews, Christians & Zoroastrians. Oh, you did not know about it? Read the Pact of Umar.


    24. Recognizes with deep concern the global rise in the number of incidents of intolerance and violence against members of religious minorities in various parts of the world [in particular] motivated by [different forms of religious intolerance] [Islamophobia, anti-Arabism, anti-Semitism and Christianophobia];

    Such as discrimination and pogroms against Christians in Egypt? Are you concerned about their rights & welfare? How about Christians being persecuted by Muslims in Bethlehem?

    ALT: Recognizes with deep concern the global rise in the number of incidents of intolerance and violence against members of religious minorities in various parts of the world;

    25. Condemns any advocacy of racial or religious hatred which constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, and recognizes that only a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law may determine, case by case, in a fair and public hearing, whether the facts presented qualify as incitement to racial or religious hatred [prohibited by law];

    Why don’t you come right out and openly condemn the Qur’an, which declares war on Pagans, Jews, Christians & Zoroastrians? I previously showed you the ayat declaring war and one hadith confirming them. Why don’t you do something about that?

    ALT: Condemns any advocacy of racial or religious hatred which constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, and [should be prohibited by law;]

    The Qur’an inculcates hatred of Jews, Christians & Pagans. Why don’t you condemn it? Why don’t you specifically & explicitly condemn 8:39, 9:29 & 9:123? Why don’t you condemn the ahadith which confirm those imperatives to conquest?

    26. [[Notes with concern] [Seriously concerned at the] instances of defamation of religions, which manifests itself in [projecting negative, insulting and derogatory images of religions and religious personalities,] generalized and stereotypical association of religions, in particular Islam, with violence and terrorism, thus impacting negatively on the rights of individuals belonging to these religions, including Muslim minorities, and exposing them to hatred and discrimination. Such situations are further aggravated by the imposition of restrictions on the profession of religions, including [the surveillance of places of worship and restrictions on their construction] [the construction of places of worship and their surveillance];]

    Paragraph 26 is redundant; I previously proved that the assertion of stereotypical association of Islam with violence & terrorism is malicious malarkey.

    28. Reaffirms a holistic approach to human rights guaranteeing the indivisibility of all human rights, and stresses that [fundamental freedoms of expression and association should continue to contribute and promote the positive and desirable phenomenon of multiculturalism, respect for cultural diversity and tolerance among all religions, peoples and societies.] [the fight against racial and religious hatred should not serve as a pretext to legitimize impermissible limitations to freedom of expression] [as the right to freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society as it ensures individual self-fulfillment and a pluralistic, tolerant society with access to multitudes of ideas and philosophies];

    ALT/NEW PARA: Reiterates that freedom of religion or belief, freedom of opinion and expression and non-discrimination are interdependent and stresses the need to strengthen the process of effectively adjudicating cases associated with incitement to national racial and religious hatred in accordance with the permissible limitations under article 20 of the ICCPR and analogous instruments;

    NEW PARA: Recognizes the importance of the positive role that can be played by the media in this context in particular through a responsible media that abstains from diffusing hate or defamatory information and that engages to fight against such practices;

    Islam will not tolerate criticism. Here is an example: the Secretary General condemning Fitna

    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 displays verses from the Qur’an with rabble rousing Imams, Islamic mob scenes and the aftermath of terrorism. It shows cause & effect. That is neither hate speech nor incitement; it is objective factual reality. Saying anything negative about Allah, his Messenger or their canon of scripture is a capital offense.

    • O8.7: Acts that Entail Leaving Islam
    • -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;

    • -16- to revile the religion of Islam;
    • -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). )

    • 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.

    The pact of Dhimmitude is violated if a Dhimmi says anything negative about Islam.

    • O11.10 or mentions something impermissible about Allah, the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), or Islam

    143. [Calls on CERD and the Human Rights Committee to elaborate model legislation on [the necessity of upholding respect for human rights and reputation, public morals, as well as] incitement to racial and religious hatred and freedom of expression;]

    We have already seen their determination to silence Islam’s critics. They are demanding criminalization of expression critical of Islam.

    Action at the national level (Racist theories, ideologies, doctrines, incitement to racial hatred, nationalist ideologies, national preference theories)

    NEW PARA: Calls on States [that while identifying] [to identify] [different forms and manifestations of] [new emerging forms and manifestations of] racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance] [and] take effective, tangible and comprehensive measures to prevent, combat and eradicate them as a matter of priority;

    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];

    Remember that criticism of Islam is equated with racism in their Orwellian new speak. These provisions effectively demand the passage and enforcement of legislation outlawing and penalizing criticism of Islam in clear and open violation of the first amendment.

    [ALT: Calls on States to combat impunity for acts of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobiaand related intolerance and provide [by providing] [just and adequate] [maximum] [fair] redress for victims, including through securing expeditious access to justice;]

    153. Urges States, as a matter of priority, to [prohibit] [and criminalize] [any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence in accordance with [all] pertinent international instruments] [and punish violent, racist and xenophobic activities of neo-Nazi groups in accordance with pertinent international instruments]; ALT: Urges States, as a matter of priority, to prohibit [and criminalize] any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence in accordance with all pertinent international instruments and punish violent, racist and xenophobic activities [of neo-Nazi groups] accordingly;

    154. Invites Governments and their law enforcement agencies to collect reliable information on hate crimes in order to strengthen their efforts to combat racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance; [Adopted ad ref.]

    According to those arrogant, self-righteous AssWholes, this blog post is a criminal offense. Re-examine The Secretary General’s egregious remark.

    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.”

    Watch the video again, through the link I provided. Is that hate speech? Does Geert Wilders incite anyone to violence? Were the ayat he quoted hate speech? Did those ayat incite violence? Did the Imams ranting & raving in the video utter hate speech and incite violence? Did Ban Ki-moon condemn the wrong person, letting the real malfactor go condoned, not condemned?

    To Islam and its United Nations Dhimmis, pointing out Islam’s hate & violence is hate speech and inciting violence. That is Orwellian moral inversion at its finest!

    (Freedom of religion, incitement to religious intolerance, hatred, or violence, defamation of religion, freedom of expression)

    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;

    161. Reminds States to promote and protect the exercise of the rights set out in the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief, proclaimed by the General Assembly in its resolution 36/55 of 25 November 1981, in order to obviate religious discrimination which, when combined with certain other forms of discrimination, constitutes a form of multiple discrimination;

    162. Calls on States to ensure that lawmakers discharge their responsibilities in conformity with paragraph 2 of article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and article 4 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, taking into account General Comment 15 of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination;

    These demands for legislation criminalizing revelation of the truth about Islam from its own canon of scripture, tradition & jurisprudence is absolutely unacceptable! I will not accept it. I curse and condemn it and its authors.

    I disrespectfully demand:

    1. That Secretary of State Hillary Clinton publicly reject the Durban II draft document as revised and forswear U.S. participation in the conference.
    2. That the Congress pass and President Obama execute legislation withholding payment of such part of our U.N. assessment as would be used to finance the Durban II conference.
    3. That the Congress pass and President Obama execute articles of withdrawal from the U.N. and legislation expelling that organization and its appendages from our soil.

    I urge and exhort all U.S. citizens who read this blog post to join me in those disrespectful demands. Please sign and promote the following related petitions:
    Quit the U.N.!
    Outlaw Islam!

    Related blog posts:


    Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Part 1
    Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Part 2
    Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Part 3
    Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Part 4
    Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Part 5
    Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Part 6
    Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Part 7

    United Nations Ban Criticism of Islam
    UN Resolutions Revisited: Defamation of Religions
    U.N. Bans Criticism of Islam: Pretext
    More UN AssWholliness
    U.N. Interfaith Dialogue Conference
    Abdullah: On the Level or Sneaky Devil?
    Monologue: Prince Saud Al Faisal Spills the Beans
    Culture of Peace Conference

    Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Repackaged

    Now comes word [a special report] from Eye on the UN that the Durban II Draft has been revised.
    Eye on the UN has a special page set aside for Durban II where you can find links to vital documents related to this issue. The revision is in the form of a 38 page, 192KB pdf document. The release notes follow.

    Criteria used for technical review:

    • The structure of the current document follows PC.2/8;
    • All themes and messages of the compilation have been preserved;
    • Duplicate provisions were deleted;
    • Similar paragraphs were merged;
    • Provisions identical to the DDPA were removed;
    • Provisions similar to the DDPA and thus weakening it were removed;
    • Region-specific language was made general or deleted;
    • Paragraphs from the compilation marked with an * for which no language has been submitted were condensed or deleted;
    • Paragraphs were located in accordance with the objectives of the respective sections;
    • The annex to section 4 containing examples of best practices is suggested to be removed;
    • Grammatical corrections were made as well as soft editing;
    • Subheadings in italics were temporarily introduced to facilitate future work.

    But did they make the draft report acceptable to lovers of truth, justice, life & liberty? Hell no! If you expected substantive improvement, you are severely deluded and probably require institutionalization.

    Eye On the UN lists four areas of concern.

    1. Demonizing Israel
    2. Thwarting the war to end terrorism
    3. Limiting freedom of expression
    4. Creating the Islamic victim

    I do not recall seeing mention of one particular issue which angers me: corrupting our language by conflating objections to Jihad with racism.

    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;

    That festering lump of feces comes from: Preliminary document of the African Regional Conference Preparatory to the Durban Review Conference.

    Opposition to Islam is not phobic! There is absolutely nothing irrational about it. Islam’s demonic mandate to conquer and subjugate the entire world, expressed in two ayat containing explicit imperatives to make war [8:39, 9:29] confirmed by hadith [Bukhari 1.8.387] and reflected in Islam’s Sharia law [Reliance of the Traveller Book O9.8, 9.9] renders Islam absolutely intolerable. Nor is Islam a race; it victimizes people of several races, so that Allah’s slaves include people of Black, Caucasian and Asian heritage.

    Hence forth you know that whenever you read ‘racism’ or ‘related intolerance’ in a UN resolution, you can substitute rejection of Islam. Durban II word count:

    • racism: 108
    • related intolerance: 67
    • terrorism: 9
    • Islamophobia: 2
    • profiling: 7
    • defamation: 7
    • defamation of religion: 5
    • defamation of religions: 3

    On page 5 of the pdf, we find this maggot encrusted lump:

    Notes with concern instances of defamation of religions, which manifests itself in generalized and stereotypical association of religions, in particular Islam, with violence and terrorism, thus impacting negatively on the rights of individuals belonging to these religions, including Muslim minorities, and exposing them to hatred and discrimination. Such situations are further aggravated by the imposition of restrictions on the profession of religions, including restrictions on the construction of places of worship and their surveillance; (merger paras 2, 42, 43, 45, 46 section 1)

    • stereotypical association of religions, in particular Islam, with violence and terrorism

    I already showed you why Islam is associated with violence; why is Islam associated with terrorism?

    • 3:151. We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve…
    • 8:12.I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes.
    • 8:57. 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.
    • 8:60.[Abdullah Yusuf Ali] 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.
    • 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.
    • 59:2. 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).
    • 59:13. Verily, you (believers in the Oneness of Allah – Islamic Monotheism) are more awful as a fear in their (Jews of Bani An-Nadir) breasts than Allah. That is because they are a people who comprehend not (the Majesty and Power of Allah).
    • Bukhari Volume 1, Book 7, Number 331:Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month’s journey.
    • Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220: I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy),

    Got a clue yet? If not, you must be a LibTard, and never will have a clue until the Mujahideen are sawing your head off with a dull knife. Moe was ordered to fight, made victorious by frightening & terrifying his victims and made wealthy by conquests, yet we are sternly advised that Islam is stereotypically associated with violence and terrorism. Yeah, right. That feces spewed from the mouth of Hemayet Uddin, inter alia.

    • Such situations are further aggravated by the imposition of restrictions on the profession of religions, including restrictions on the construction of places of worship and their surveillance;

    How many churches are there in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia? There are many Christians imported as service workers, but no churches, why? What happens when Copts wish to build a new church or repair an old one? Why?

    • O11.5-7 and are forbidden to build new churches

    A hint for the clueless: Is there some reason why the profession & practice of Islam should not be restricted? Should Mosques not be surveilled after weapons and CBW related materials and equipment were found in a British Mosque?

    The terminally ignorant do not comprehend the fact that Jihad: aggressive warfare to propagate Islam and seize real & personal property, genocide: making a great slaughter and terrorism: casting terror are intrinsic sacraments of Islam. You can not properly practice Islam without practicing them.

    Jihad is not an anachronism; it must be continued until all resistance ceases and only Allah is worshiped. It must be continued until all “people of the book” are subjugated & extorted. Jihad will be practiced continuously from the beginning of Moe’s prophetic career in 610 to the last day. Abandoning Jihad for more productive pursuits will cause Muslims to be cursed until they return to their “original religion”.

    Acknowledges that a most disturbing phenomenon is the intellectual and ideological validation of Islamophobia. When it is expressed against migrants it takes the form of religious-ethnic or religious-racial tones, when it is expressed in the form of defamation of religions, it takes cover behind the freedom of expression and when it is expressed in the form of profiling, it hides behind the war against terrorism. Believes that association of terrorism and violence with Islam or any other religion, including through publication of offensive caricatures and making of hate documentaries, would purposely complicate our common endeavours to address several contemporary issues, including the fight against terrorism and the occupation of foreign territories and peoples; (para 45 section 1)

    They are bitching about the Danish cartoons, FITNA and blog posts such as this. They want to criminalize exposing Moe as the terrorist he was.

    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; (para 100 section 5)

    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; (para 96 c) section 5)

    Would it have been proper, in 1935, to criminalize criticism of Hitler and his Nazi Party? How can we debate strategy & tactics in the current war without identifying and accurately describing the enemy and its doctrines? The UN has been co-oped by the enemy and is attempting to disarm us so that we will be led, dumb like sheep, to the slaughter.

    Calls upon States to develop, in cooperation with multilateral organizations, Internet service providers, private sector stakeholders and civil society, and taking into account the principles of multilateralism, democracy and transparency, a coordinated global strategy to formulate a voluntary code of ethical conduct with a view to prohibiting the proliferation of ideas of superiority and the justification of racial or religious hatred and discrimination in any form, and promoting mutual respect and tolerance among all peoples; (merger paras 107, 110 section 5)

    • prohibiting the proliferation of ideas of superiority and the justification of racial or religious hatred and discrimination in any form

    How are you going to outlaw the Qur’an? It has been published in many languages, copies exist in Mosques, Madrassahs, private homes, libraries and book stores all over the world. Anyone who does not perceive the perverse absurdity of that call should remove himself from the gene pool for the benefit of society.

    The bottom line: The Durban II Draft is an intolerable affront to logic, morality, truth, justice and liberty. It must be rejected. The American people must rise up as one disrespectfully demanding abstention from the Durban II meetings and withdrawal from the UN. We must rise up as one to condemn & curse those who condescendingly demand that we submit and surrender to Islam. Their arrogance can not be accepted. We must extend to them the impudent digit and the
    thumb of death.

    In this blog post, I have presented evidence from Islam’s own canon of scripture, tradition & jurisprudence. The source documents are easily accessible on the web. The links to hadith will lead you to the USC MSA’s Compendium of Islamic Texts where you can access the Qur’an in three parallel translations and the four major hadith collections. At scribid.com you can read a scanned image of Reliance of the Traveller, using a search engine to find specific text or the Book & Chapter designators.

    Those ignorant, deluded fools who believe that I quote the Qur’an out of context, perverting, distorting or mis-translating it should turn to Ibn Kathir’s Tafsir which will expose their idiotic assumptions. http://www.qtafsir.com has a search engine with which you can look up any verse included in the tafsir. Try these topics, which confirm the validity of what I have posted here.

    I dissected the previous draft, exposing the lies, deceit & hypocrisy therein contained in the posts listed below.

    Durban II: An Early test of Obama’s Mid-East Intentions


    The 2001 UN World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in Durban quickly became a disgusting display of anti-Semitism and anti-Israel Propaganda. Much of the hatred took place in a six-day NGO Forum in a large cricket stadium attended by six thousand representatives of close to two thousand NGOs. It is there that the “Durban Strategy” was formulated, that is delegitimize the Jewish State via branding it as a racist entity. To his credit Then Secretary of State Colin Powell walked out of the conference.

    Last month the United Nations released the draft statement for the follow-up conference scheduled for Geneva in April 2009. This conference is planned to be worse than the first one, It is an Anti-Jewish, Anti-America and Anti-Freedom HATE FEST. There are even sections which will restrict freedom of speech. Other nations have announced that they will not attend.

    On Jan. 23, the Canadian foreign minister made the clear statement of principle that “Canada will not participate in the 2009 conference.” A week later, 27 senators sent a letter to Rice asking her to do the same. Having had no response, on Feb. 13 during a Senate hearing, Sen. Norm Coleman asked Rice point-blank, would she make the same statement and refuse to “provide credibility to this process by participating?” Rice answered: “No, we’ve not made that statement. … We have not tried to make a final decision on this.

    The Secretary of State had decided to punt it to the NEXT administration.

    The United States should show leadership and morality. President-elect Obama should announce immediately that we will NOT attend this hate fest. His decision to attend or not will be an early test of his true intentions regarding the Middle-East, as well as the appeasement of Islamo-fascism and anti-Semitism.

    Read the rest here.

    From Monkey in the Middle:

    While European nations will attend, Canada and of course Israel will not be attending. The United States should be taking the lead in this, but will not. If history is any indication of what this kangaroo court will be like, then you can expect the UN aka Tower of Babel, to condemn Israel and Judaism. We can expect these purveyors of hatred to force the world into silence on Islam and to announce Islam as the world’s only true religion.

    I also expect that Barack Hussein Obama, being true to his Muslim background, will not only have the US attending Durban II, but will lead the charge against Israel.

    And that is his idea of Change. God help us!

    Cross posted from Monkey in the Middle

    Durban II: An Early test of Obama’s Mid-East Intentions


    The 2001 UN World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in Durban quickly became a disgusting display of anti-Semitism and anti-Israel Propaganda. Much of the hatred took place in a six-day NGO Forum in a large cricket stadium attended by six thousand representatives of close to two thousand NGOs. It is there that the “Durban Strategy” was formulated, that is delegitimize the Jewish State via branding it as a racist entity. To his credit Then Secretary of State Colin Powell walked out of the conference.

    Last month the United Nations released the draft statement for the follow-up conference scheduled for Geneva in April 2009. This conference is planned to be worse than the first one, It is an Anti-Jewish, Anti-America and Anti-Freedom HATE FEST. There are even sections which will restrict freedom of speech. Other nations have announced that they will not attend.

    On Jan. 23, the Canadian foreign minister made the clear statement of principle that “Canada will not participate in the 2009 conference.” A week later, 27 senators sent a letter to Rice asking her to do the same. Having had no response, on Feb. 13 during a Senate hearing, Sen. Norm Coleman asked Rice point-blank, would she make the same statement and refuse to “provide credibility to this process by participating?” Rice answered: “No, we’ve not made that statement. … We have not tried to make a final decision on this.

    The Secretary of State had decided to punt it to the NEXT administration.

    The United States should show leadership and morality. President-elect Obama should announce immediately that we will NOT attend this hate fest. His decision to attend or not will be an early test of his true intentions regarding the Middle-East, as well as the appeasement of Islamo-fascism and anti-Semitism.

    Read the rest here.

    From Monkey in the Middle:

    While European nations will attend, Canada and of course Israel will not be attending. The United States should be taking the lead in this, but will not. If history is any indication of what this kangaroo court will be like, then you can expect the UN aka Tower of Babel, to condemn Israel and Judaism. We can expect these purveyors of hatred to force the world into silence on Islam and to announce Islam as the world’s only true religion.

    I also expect that Barack Hussein Obama, being true to his Muslim background, will not only have the US attending Durban II, but will lead the charge against Israel.

    And that is his idea of Change. God help us!

    Cross posted from Monkey in the Middle

    Geneva: Where the Muslims Rule and the West Caves In.

    Cross posted at Reject the UN and Monkey in the Middle

    In early 2009 the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) will be holding a large conference to deal with the world’s human rights issues. Will they be addressing the ongoing genocide in Darfur? Will they finally address the inequality of women in Muslim nations? Will they address the systematic murder of homosexuals, Christians and Baha’i in Iran?

    U.N. Thugs

    By Christine Williams
    FrontPageMagazine.com

    Support for Israel has never ranked high on the United Nations’ agenda. And the upcoming World Conference Against Racism, scheduled for early 2009 in Geneva, Switzerland, presents a valid case. Many observers are concerned that the UN-sponsored event will simply serve as yet another a platform to launch attacks against Israel — as the previous world anti-racism conference did in Durban, South Africa, seven years ago.

    Even by the standards of the organization’s traditional antagonism toward the Jewish State, the U.N.’s 2001 Durban gathering marked a low point. To the extent that “racism” was discussed, it was only to condemn Israeli policies. Little wonder that the conference, known as “ Durban I,” is largely remembered as a U.N.-backed assault on Israel.

    Now it’s back. And if early evidence is any guide, Durban II, as the Geneva event is already being called, will be a replay of its predecessor. Consider that the chair of the conference’s planning committee is Libya, whose longtime leader, Muammar Gadhafi, has recently claimed that the Israeli Mossad aims to assassinate Barack Obama. The vice chair of the conference, meanwhile, is communist Cuba. And the fact that Iran’s president has notoriously called for Israel’s destruction has not, expectedly, prevented it from playing a key leadership role in the upcoming conference.

    Nor does it bode well for Durban II that its agenda will be set by the 56-member Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC). In particular, the conference will consider responses to “Islamophobia.” In this connection, the OIC’s members will consider what they regard as the problematic Western right to free speech. Referring to the cartoons of the prophet Mohammed published in Danish newspaper Jyllands Posten and to “Fitna,” Dutch politician Geert Wilders’s documentary about Islam, OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu recently promised to send “a clear message to the West regarding the red lines that should not be crossed.” He went on to warn Western countries to “look seriously into the question of freedom of expression.

    For their part, Western countries should make clear that they will not allow the OIC to dictate what can and cannot be said about Islam. Instead, they should shift the focus onto the OIC. Instead of concerning themselves with alleged Western prejudices, Islamic states would do well to ponder the rampant racism in the Muslim World. Darfur, where an estimated 300,000 Muslims have been killed by their fellow Muslims, prompting the United Nations to call it the worst human rights disaster in the world, would be a logical starting point. From there, the OIC might consider the continued bloodshed between Shiites and Sunnis, and the fanatical suicide bombers who have claimed the lives of thousands of their co-religionists. One need hardly look to the West to find “Islamophobia” in action.

    As for “racism,” the conference’s nominal subject, it is worth bearing in mind that slavery – the most racist of practices – endures in the Islamic world even as it has been abolished in the West. In OIC member states like Sudan and Mauritania, Arabs still keep black African slaves. Sudan ‘s president, Omar al-Bashir, who was indicted by the World Court for human rights abuses in Darfur, is reputed to have black slaves in his own house. According to NGO reports, some 200,000 southern Sudanese have been enslaved during Bashir’s reign, a practice that the UN has charged is “deeply rooted in Arab and Muslim supremacism.” (Such grim statistics did not deter the Sudanese Minister of Justice from demanding, in a stunning act of hypocrisy, reparations for historical slavery during Durban I.) And while Mauritania legally abolished slavery in 1980, it is still practiced secretly. Even Muslims in the West have not accepted its ban on slavery. For example, four Arab princesses were found in July living in Brussels with 17 slaves.

    The persistence of slavery in the Muslim world is not, of course, surprising. In August 1990, the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights was affirmed by the 57 member states of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). It stated that Islamic Sharia law is the sole source of the Islamic perspective on human rights. And slavery is codified in Sharia law. It is doubtful, naturally, that this detail will be much discussed during Durban II.

    In light of recent history, it makes sense that Israel has decided to boycott next year’s conference. Canada has also decided to boycott Durban II, and other Western countries should consider following the Canadian example. It’s the height of absurdity for free nations to have to endure lectures on human rights from its preeminent abusers. In 2001, they could have claimed to be unaware of the conference’s sinister agenda. Seven years later, ignorance is no longer an excuse or an option.

    Geneva, Sept. 8, 2008 — After new UN rights chief Navanethem Pillay addressed the 47-nation Human Rights Council for the first time today, independent human rights organization UN Watch praised her “inspiring life example as an anti-apartheid advocate,” yet expressed deep concern over her remarks praising the UN’s preparations for a follow-up to the troubled 2001 Durban world conference on racism. Her defense of the Durban process was immediately hailed in the plenary by Pakistan on behalf of the Islamic states, Egypt for the African bloc, Cuba for the Non-Aligned, Russia and South Africa.

    Without mentioning their names, Pillay criticized the current absence in the UN deliberations of Canada, the U.S. and Israel, as well as similar threats to walk out of the already controversial April 2009 conference made by the French, U.K. and Dutch governments.

    “I do not believe that ‘all or nothing’ is the right approach to affirm one’s principles or to win an argument,” said Pillay. “Should differences be allowed to become pretexts for inaction, the hopes and aspirations of the many victims of intolerance would be dashed irreparably. For these reasons, I urge those governments that have expressed an intention not to participate to reconsider their position,” she said.

    According to UN Watch, Pillay “is shooting in the wrong direction. Why is the high commissioner aiming her fire at the world’s most tolerant democracies, instead of at racist tyrants like Sudan’s Omar al-Bashir and Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who, under the chairmanship of Muammar Qaddafi’s Libya, have already begun to hijack the conference?,” asked UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer.

    In her speech, Pillay praised the African states’ recent preparatory conference, held in Abuja, Nigeria on August 24-26, as “productive.”

    “In fact,” said Neuer, “the Abuja conference utterly failed its stated mission, and was a major setback for the anti-racism cause and millions suffering around the globe. Its concluding declaration failed to say a word for the victims of Sudan’s atrocities in Darfur, or those other African governments perpetrating ethnic violence. Instead, it explicitly attacked free speech and singled out Israel — exactly what the UN’s highest officials promised Durban II wouldn’t do. The high commissioner ought to be taking on the hijackers of the anti-racism conference, instead of the few that seek to resist them.”

    “We remind the high commissioner that in 2001, the most virulent and inciteful language of the Durban declaration was removed only under the pressure of European threats to walk out, as the U.S. and Israel did. So too now, the threat of Western non-participation remains the only force with the slightest chance of preventing the conference from degenerating into an out-and-out fiasco,” said Neuer.

    An early draft of the April conference’s outcome document, released by a UN planning committee on Friday, reserves space to include provisions adopted by the African conference in Abuja. The Abuja text calls on states “to refrain from condoning incitement to racial and religious hatred and violence under the pretext of free speech” (par 13). It also expresses “concern about the plight of the Palestinian people under foreign occupations” (par. 32). The rest of the document focuses on Western practices today and in the past against people of African descent.

    I do not expect that the Geneva conference aka Durban II will be any different than the first Durban conference. Darfur will not be discussed. Women’s rights will not be discussed. Gays, Christians and Baha’i will not be discussed. Slavery will not be discussed. But Israel and Judaism will be condemned over and over and over again.

    I am glad that at least 3 nations will not be attending this hatefest. Israel, Canada and the United States already have said, “Thanks but no thanks!” to the hatemongers. It is time for the rest of the Free World to come on board and reject this obscenity.

    Geneva: Where the Muslims Rule and the West Caves In.

    Cross posted at Reject the UN and Monkey in the Middle

    In early 2009 the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) will be holding a large conference to deal with the world’s human rights issues. Will they be addressing the ongoing genocide in Darfur? Will they finally address the inequality of women in Muslim nations? Will they address the systematic murder of homosexuals, Christians and Baha’i in Iran?

    U.N. Thugs

    By Christine Williams
    FrontPageMagazine.com

    Support for Israel has never ranked high on the United Nations’ agenda. And the upcoming World Conference Against Racism, scheduled for early 2009 in Geneva, Switzerland, presents a valid case. Many observers are concerned that the UN-sponsored event will simply serve as yet another a platform to launch attacks against Israel — as the previous world anti-racism conference did in Durban, South Africa, seven years ago.

    Even by the standards of the organization’s traditional antagonism toward the Jewish State, the U.N.’s 2001 Durban gathering marked a low point. To the extent that “racism” was discussed, it was only to condemn Israeli policies. Little wonder that the conference, known as “ Durban I,” is largely remembered as a U.N.-backed assault on Israel.

    Now it’s back. And if early evidence is any guide, Durban II, as the Geneva event is already being called, will be a replay of its predecessor. Consider that the chair of the conference’s planning committee is Libya, whose longtime leader, Muammar Gadhafi, has recently claimed that the Israeli Mossad aims to assassinate Barack Obama. The vice chair of the conference, meanwhile, is communist Cuba. And the fact that Iran’s president has notoriously called for Israel’s destruction has not, expectedly, prevented it from playing a key leadership role in the upcoming conference.

    Nor does it bode well for Durban II that its agenda will be set by the 56-member Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC). In particular, the conference will consider responses to “Islamophobia.” In this connection, the OIC’s members will consider what they regard as the problematic Western right to free speech. Referring to the cartoons of the prophet Mohammed published in Danish newspaper Jyllands Posten and to “Fitna,” Dutch politician Geert Wilders’s documentary about Islam, OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu recently promised to send “a clear message to the West regarding the red lines that should not be crossed.” He went on to warn Western countries to “look seriously into the question of freedom of expression.

    For their part, Western countries should make clear that they will not allow the OIC to dictate what can and cannot be said about Islam. Instead, they should shift the focus onto the OIC. Instead of concerning themselves with alleged Western prejudices, Islamic states would do well to ponder the rampant racism in the Muslim World. Darfur, where an estimated 300,000 Muslims have been killed by their fellow Muslims, prompting the United Nations to call it the worst human rights disaster in the world, would be a logical starting point. From there, the OIC might consider the continued bloodshed between Shiites and Sunnis, and the fanatical suicide bombers who have claimed the lives of thousands of their co-religionists. One need hardly look to the West to find “Islamophobia” in action.

    As for “racism,” the conference’s nominal subject, it is worth bearing in mind that slavery – the most racist of practices – endures in the Islamic world even as it has been abolished in the West. In OIC member states like Sudan and Mauritania, Arabs still keep black African slaves. Sudan ‘s president, Omar al-Bashir, who was indicted by the World Court for human rights abuses in Darfur, is reputed to have black slaves in his own house. According to NGO reports, some 200,000 southern Sudanese have been enslaved during Bashir’s reign, a practice that the UN has charged is “deeply rooted in Arab and Muslim supremacism.” (Such grim statistics did not deter the Sudanese Minister of Justice from demanding, in a stunning act of hypocrisy, reparations for historical slavery during Durban I.) And while Mauritania legally abolished slavery in 1980, it is still practiced secretly. Even Muslims in the West have not accepted its ban on slavery. For example, four Arab princesses were found in July living in Brussels with 17 slaves.

    The persistence of slavery in the Muslim world is not, of course, surprising. In August 1990, the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights was affirmed by the 57 member states of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). It stated that Islamic Sharia law is the sole source of the Islamic perspective on human rights. And slavery is codified in Sharia law. It is doubtful, naturally, that this detail will be much discussed during Durban II.

    In light of recent history, it makes sense that Israel has decided to boycott next year’s conference. Canada has also decided to boycott Durban II, and other Western countries should consider following the Canadian example. It’s the height of absurdity for free nations to have to endure lectures on human rights from its preeminent abusers. In 2001, they could have claimed to be unaware of the conference’s sinister agenda. Seven years later, ignorance is no longer an excuse or an option.

    Geneva, Sept. 8, 2008 — After new UN rights chief Navanethem Pillay addressed the 47-nation Human Rights Council for the first time today, independent human rights organization UN Watch praised her “inspiring life example as an anti-apartheid advocate,” yet expressed deep concern over her remarks praising the UN’s preparations for a follow-up to the troubled 2001 Durban world conference on racism. Her defense of the Durban process was immediately hailed in the plenary by Pakistan on behalf of the Islamic states, Egypt for the African bloc, Cuba for the Non-Aligned, Russia and South Africa.

    Without mentioning their names, Pillay criticized the current absence in the UN deliberations of Canada, the U.S. and Israel, as well as similar threats to walk out of the already controversial April 2009 conference made by the French, U.K. and Dutch governments.

    “I do not believe that ‘all or nothing’ is the right approach to affirm one’s principles or to win an argument,” said Pillay. “Should differences be allowed to become pretexts for inaction, the hopes and aspirations of the many victims of intolerance would be dashed irreparably. For these reasons, I urge those governments that have expressed an intention not to participate to reconsider their position,” she said.

    According to UN Watch, Pillay “is shooting in the wrong direction. Why is the high commissioner aiming her fire at the world’s most tolerant democracies, instead of at racist tyrants like Sudan’s Omar al-Bashir and Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who, under the chairmanship of Muammar Qaddafi’s Libya, have already begun to hijack the conference?,” asked UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer.

    In her speech, Pillay praised the African states’ recent preparatory conference, held in Abuja, Nigeria on August 24-26, as “productive.”

    “In fact,” said Neuer, “the Abuja conference utterly failed its stated mission, and was a major setback for the anti-racism cause and millions suffering around the globe. Its concluding declaration failed to say a word for the victims of Sudan’s atrocities in Darfur, or those other African governments perpetrating ethnic violence. Instead, it explicitly attacked free speech and singled out Israel — exactly what the UN’s highest officials promised Durban II wouldn’t do. The high commissioner ought to be taking on the hijackers of the anti-racism conference, instead of the few that seek to resist them.”

    “We remind the high commissioner that in 2001, the most virulent and inciteful language of the Durban declaration was removed only under the pressure of European threats to walk out, as the U.S. and Israel did. So too now, the threat of Western non-participation remains the only force with the slightest chance of preventing the conference from degenerating into an out-and-out fiasco,” said Neuer.

    An early draft of the April conference’s outcome document, released by a UN planning committee on Friday, reserves space to include provisions adopted by the African conference in Abuja. The Abuja text calls on states “to refrain from condoning incitement to racial and religious hatred and violence under the pretext of free speech” (par 13). It also expresses “concern about the plight of the Palestinian people under foreign occupations” (par. 32). The rest of the document focuses on Western practices today and in the past against people of African descent.

    I do not expect that the Geneva conference aka Durban II will be any different than the first Durban conference. Darfur will not be discussed. Women’s rights will not be discussed. Gays, Christians and Baha’i will not be discussed. Slavery will not be discussed. But Israel and Judaism will be condemned over and over and over again.

    I am glad that at least 3 nations will not be attending this hatefest. Israel, Canada and the United States already have said, “Thanks but no thanks!” to the hatemongers. It is time for the rest of the Free World to come on board and reject this obscenity.