Ad Hoc Cmte: Non-Paper

On December 5, 2008, there was issued, on the letterhead of the High Commissioner For Human Rights, by Ambassador Idriss Jazairy, President of the Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards, a “Non-Paper Paper” and a cover letter explaining its purpose. [Emphasis & links added.]
[Due to the use of OCR to extract quotes from scanned document images, there will be some spelling errors and a few Anglicized words will be Americanized. ]

The purpose of this “Non paper” is to stimulate a constructive debate on the content and the framework of major areas of vulnerability which for reasons of substance and/or of procedure suffer from protection gaps. Some of these areas are related to the contemporary manifestations of racism, ~ racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.The purpose of this “Non-paper” is also to invite concrete responses and recommendations based on its content.

The Ambassador set forth the Non Paper’s terms of reference.

  • Paragraph 199 of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action that recommended to the Commission on Human Rights, now replaced by the Human Rights Council, to elaborate complementary intenational standards aimed at strengthening and updating international instruments against all forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.
  • Decision 3/IO3 of the Human Rights Council that decides, in pursuance of decision and instruction of the 2001 World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance to establish an Ad Hoc Committee of the Human Rights Council with the mandate to elaborate, as a matter of priority and necessity, complementary standards in the form of either a convention or additional protocol (s) to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racism, racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and related Intolerance that will ill the existing gaps in the Convention and also provide new normative texts aimed at combating all forms of contemporary racism, including incitement to racial and religious hatred.
  • Resolution 6/21 of the Human Rights Council on the elaboration of new international complementary standards to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

The following listed phrases are critical because they are encoded to conceal the true intentions of the committee.

  • all forms of racism
  • related intolerance
  • incitement to racial and religious hatred

We must always bear in mind how the United Nations twist the English language!!! The following quote is from Preliminary document of the African Regional Conference Preparatory to the Durban Review Conference [Emphasis added.]

4. Emphasizes the urgent need to address the scourges of anti-Semitism, Christianophobia, and Islamophobia as contemporary forms of racism as well as racial and violent movements based on racism and discriminatory ideas directed at African, Arab, Christian, Jewish, Muslim and other communities;

Islamophobia = racism!!!

The Ambassador directed the member states to keep in mind::

all views expressed and contributions made within the framework of the follow-up mechanisms of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, including:

  • The survey of the five experts on the nature and the scope of substantive gaps, with regard to issues of content in the existing international instruments to combat racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance (A/HRC/4/W G.3/ 6) ;
  • The document of the Committee on the Elimination of racial discrimination on possible measures to strengthen the implementation of the final observations by adopting new recommendations by updating its monitoring procedures (All-IRC/4/WG.3/7)
  • The responses provided by the Committee ou the Elimination of racial discrimination to the questionnaire by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights pursuant to decision PC.1/ 10 of the Preparatory Committee of the Durban Review Conference (A/CON’F.2l1/PC.2/CRP.5) including the relevant points of view made by the Members ofthe Committee on behalf ofthe latter; ~
  • The Report of the 5th session of the Intergovernmental Working Group on the Effective implementation of the Durban Conference and Prcgrarnmc of Action (A/HCR/6/10) and all relevant recommendations and conclusions adopted by this Group since its creation, particularly those contained in document(AH.CR/AC.!/I/CRP.2);
  • The discussions that took place during the first session of the Ad hoc Committee on complementary standards, held from 18 to 2l February 2008.

The Ambassador lists the following revelations from the two previous sessions.

  • There is global collective agreement and commitment expressed during the 2001 World Conference against racism on the principle of claborating international complementary standards to strengthen and update the international instruments against all forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance (para 199 of the Durban Programme of Action);
  • However, no consensus was reached on how the specific form of/manner of giving concrete expression to this commiuncnt in priciple;
  • We must also bear in mind the ensuing debate on the links between articles 19 and 20 of the International Covenant on civil and political rights and the expert meeting of 2 and 3 October 2008, whereafter it was reiterated that the fundamental right of freedom of expression is compatible with the prohibition of any call for national, racial or religious hatred which constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility and violence;
  • It is thus imperative to reach the largest possible agreement, through the Ad hoc Committee on complementary standards, on concrete ways and means to implement the commitment in principle made: during the 2001 World Conference against racism.
  • The approach suggested to achieve this goal is to stimulate, in a positive and inclusive spirit, concrete proposals on the fields and themes laid out in the “Non paper” for which complementary standardized provisions or other measures designed to fill protection gaps, are necessary.

Of course, the revelations repeat certain code phrases.

  • all forms of racism
  • related intolerance

Next, we encounter a reference to ICCPR.

  • the fundamental right of freedom of expression is compatible with the prohibition of any call for national, racial or religious hatred which constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility and violence

Muslims, liars, lawyers & U.N. bureaucrats do not use words the way normal people do. “call for national, racial or religious hatred which constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility and violence” means any criticism of Islam, specifically the Danish Cartoons & Fitna. In this context, it is asserted that censorship of criticism of Islam does not interfere with freedom of expression.

The Non-Paper begins with a listing of its Purpose, scope and parameters:

  • Implementing paragraph 199 of the Programme of Action of the World Conference against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, in which the Conference “Rec0Recommends that the Commission on Human Rights prepare complementary international standards
  • to strengthen and update international instruments against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance in all their aspects”, as well as the relevant Human Rights Council resolutions, in particular decision 3/103 .
  • The need to enhance efforts to counter contemporary and emerging forms of manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.
  • The need to strengthen the monitoring procedures of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination with a view to enable it to undertake the responsibilities entrusted to it in a more effective manner.
  • The need to address double or multiple discrimination a continuing source of concern, as it affects certain individuals and groups, in particular gender-related racial discrimination and double discrimination on the grounds of race and religion.
  • The imperative to ensure that measures to combat terrorism respect the fundamental principles and the universally recognized standards of international law, international human rights law and international humanitarian Law.
  • The urgency of addressing racial profiling and eliminating it as a pervasive form of discrimination.
  • The need for uniform and consistent application of the law at the national and international levels to ensure the effectiveness of international efforts to counter racism and racial discrimination.
  • The need to recognize that The prohibition of the dissemination of all ideas based upon racial superiority or hatred and the prohibition of incitement to national, racial -· or religious hatred are compatible with the freedom of opinion and expression.
  • The principle of regarding provocative portrayals of objects of religious veneration as a malicious violation of the spirit of tolerance which must also be a feature of democratic society.
  • The need to re-emphasize that the prohibition of publication of material with the aim of protecting the rights of others and against seriously or gratuitously offensive attacks on matters regarded as sacred by the followers of any religion is a legitimate State objective.
  • The need for national and international law to provide adequate legal responses to propaganda of a racist and xenophobia nature committed through computer systems.
  • The need to follow the growing trend in many States to include, in their criminal I legislation, offenses in which religious motives are an aggravating factor.

Once again, the code phrases rear their ugly heads.

  • related intolerance = Islamophobia = any criticism of Islam.
  • contemporary and emerging forms of manifestations of racism = Islamophobia = any criticism of Islam.
  • measures to combat terrorism respect the fundamental principles and the universally recognized standards of intemational law, international human rights law and international humanitarian Law. This is a direct attack on surveillance of young Muslim males, such as the “magnificent 19” and other perpetrators of mass casualty attacks. Suspicion of Muslims = “racial profiling”:.
  • racial profiling
  • The need to recognize that The prohibition of the dissemination of all ideas based upon racial superiority or hatred and the prohibition of incitement to national, racial -· or religious hatred are compatible with the freedom of opinion and expression. A repetition of the egregious attack upon free speech. The reference is to the Danish Cartoons and Fitna.
  • provocative portrayals of objects of religious veneration as a malicious violation of the spirit of tolerance This is another reference to the Danish Cartoons.
  • The need to re-emphasize that the prohibition of publication of material with the aim of protecting the rights of others and against seriously or gratuitously offensive attacks on matters regarded as sacred by the followers of any religion is a legitimate State objective. Refer to the quotes from Reliance of the Traveller in the initial post of this series.
  • propaganda of a racist and xenophobia nature committed through computer systems. This is an attack upon blog posts and web sites which expose Islam’s damnable doctrines.

Eight specific themes are listed, here is #3.

3- Terrorism, racial discrimination and racial profiling:

  1. A definition of racial profiling, prioritizing human rights protection, could be elaborated and agreed upon.
  2. States must ensure that measures to combat terrorism do not discriminate, in purpose or effect on ·grounds of race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin, as well as on religious grounds, bearing in mind in this context the intersectionality between racial and religious discrimination.
  3. Profiling based on stereotypes founded on grounds of discrimination prohibited by international law, including on racial, ethnic and/or religious grounds must be prohibited by law.

Who practices terrorism? Are the majority of terror attacks perpetrated by little old ladies from Iceland? Terrorism is an intrinsic sacrament of Islam, established as such by 3:151, 8:12., 8:60, 33:26, 59:2 & 59:13. When you hear hoof beats, they probably come from horses, not from unicorns. Profiling according to current trends in the identity of perpetrators is common sense. Islam is acting through the UN to disarm us.

The fifth listed theme gets down to detail.

5- Incitement to racial, national and religious hatred

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

The listed item under sub section c would appear to be straightforward. It is not. Muslims, liars, lawyers and U.N. Bureaucrats do not use the English language to communicate, they use it to deceive! In evidence whereof I cite the egregious remarks of the Secretary General on the subject of Fitna, the short documentary by Girt Wielders.

Reuters quotes U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon about Fitna:

“There is no justification for hate speech or incitement to violence,” Ban said in a statement. “The right of free expression is not at stake here.”

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

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

Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards

Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards

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

We have only a high sounding title, for a committee instituted by men with lofty titles and low morals: the United Nations Human Rights Council.
Ms. Navanethem Pillay, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights has a hint for us.

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

They are talking about adding a protocol to the International Convention for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. The protocol would be enforceable international law, binding on the signatories. You probably overlooked some key words.

  • contemporary aspects of racism.

What the Hell does that mean? It does not mean hating people because of their skin color, physiognomy or supposed inferior culture.

The following quote is from Preliminary document of the African Regional Conference Preparatory to the Durban Review Conference [Emphasis added.]

4. Emphasizes the urgent need to address the scourges of anti-Semitism, Christianophobia, and Islamophobia as contemporary forms of racism as well as racial and violent movements based on racism and discriminatory ideas directed at African, Arab, Christian, Jewish, Muslim and other communities;

Islamophobia implies irrational fear and loathing. Considering Islam’s historical record of 270*106 innocent victims, there is nothing irrational about fearing or loathing Islam.

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

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

Durban II Draft 4/15/09

As the Durban II Draft evolved, its redundancy has been reduced, but its objectionable elements remain intact. It singles out Israel for unwarranted condemnation and demands criminalization of truthful criticism of Islam. For those reasons, I urge President Omama and Secretary of State Clinton to stand by the decision to stay away from the Racism Conference We must not lend any legitimacy to that travesty. I urge the House & Senate to pass resolutions condemning the Durban II Draft Document and to refuse to subsidize it with our tax dollars.

Draft outcome document as at 15 April 2009 at 9:00 am as amended by the Chair (4/15/2009)

1. Reaffirms the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action (DDPA), as it was adopted at the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in 2001; [adopted ad ref]

Paragraph one is unacceptable because the referenced text singled out Israel for condemnation, ignoring the human rights violations, genocides & racism of other nations. It is also unacceptable because it demands criminalization of criticism of Islam. President Obama recently cited this paragraph as his main reason for deciding not to participate in the conference.

7. Reiterates that poverty, underdevelopment, marginalization, social exclusion and economic disparities as well as foreign occupation are closely associated with racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and contribute to the persistence of racist attitudes and practices which in turn generate more poverty;

“Foreign occupation” is a code phrase for Israel bashing. The “racist attitudes and practices” which produce poverty flow directly from the Qur’an & hadith.

11. Recognizes with deep concern the negative stereotyping of religions resulting in denial or undermining the rights of persons associated with them and the global rise in the number of incidents of racial or religious intolerance and violence, including Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, Christianophobia and anti-Arabism and urges all the UN Member-States to implement the paragraph 150 of the DDPA ;

Paragraph 11 is a prime example of the pot calling the kettle black. It complains, by code words, of the Danish Cartoons and FITNA. The cartoons depict Moe as a terrorist, which he was, by his own admission. FITNA displays quotes from the Qur’an, juxtaposed with their practical application. The only right impaired by FITNA was the cartoonist’s copyright because one cartoon was used without permission. The intolerance and violence belong to the adherents of Islam, who, stirred up by rabble rousing rants at Friday prayer service, rioted in the streets.

The referenced paragraph from the DDPA reads as follows.

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;

Thus paragraph 11 demands, by reference, that national laws be passed and executed to criminalize criticism of Islam. This demand, which is incompatible with our First Amendment, is another reason for non-participation cited by President Obama.

12. 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;

The first sentence of paragraph 12 is aimed directly at the Danish Cartoons and FITNA. In actual fact, the Qur’an, Islam’s canon of sacred scripture, is replete with “religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence”.

Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s condemnation of FITNA makes the matter absolutely clear, leaving no doubt. The last clause in par. 12 is an obvious lie. The intent is to criminalize all criticism of Islam, including its mandates of perpetual war, genocide and terrorism. If we can not discuss the doctrines and practices of our enemy, we can not effectively advocate national defense against Islam’s campaign of terror.

15. Expresses its appreciation for progress made in addressing the situation of the victims of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance identified in the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, while regretting that racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, including their contemporary forms and manifestations, still persist;

“Contemporary forms and manifestations” is a code phrase for criticism of Islam. Take note of this declaration contained in the preliminary document. [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;

Objection to Islam’s continual aggression is conflated with racism. You can substitute objection to Islam wherever “racism” or “contemporary forms and manifestations” is printed in the Durban Draft.


16. Acknowledges that there should be no hierarchy among emerging and resurgent forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and that all victims should receive the same necessary attention and protection, and accordingly appropriate treatment;

Paragraph 16 is part of the effort to wrap Islam in the false mantle of victimhood. In their view, Muslims offended by the Danish Cartoons suffer equally with the Jews murdered by Hitler.


38. Urges States parties to the Convention to withdraw reservations contrary to the object and purpose of the Convention and to consider withdrawing other reservations;

The quote below comes from Wikipedia. It describes our reservation to ICERD.

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]
[Wikipedia]


SECTION 5: Identification of further concrete measures and initiatives at all levels for combating and eliminating all manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, in order to foster the implementation of the DDPA and to address challenges and impediments hereto, including in light of developments since its adoption in 2001

Remember that “related intolerance” means criticism of and objection to Islam’s perpetual aggression.


52. Stresses the need for mobilizing the political will of relevant actors at all levels which is essential to eliminate racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance;

Paragraph 52 is a code expression demanding legislation criminalizing criticism of Islam, in clear contravention of the First Amendment.


53. Reaffirms the positive role that 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;

Paragraph 53 praises the condemned man before executing him. The expressions are Orwellian in the extreme.


54. Calls on States to undertake effective media campaigns to enhance the struggle against all manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, inter alia, by disseminating and giving adequate visibility to the DDPA and its follow-up mechanisms; [adopted ad ref]

55. Calls on States to take effective, tangible and comprehensive measures to prevent, combat and eradicate all forms and manifestations; [adopted ad ref]

Paragraph 54 demands a propaganda campaign. Paragraph 55 demands national legislation to criminalize criticism of Islam.


56. Calls on States to combat impunity for acts of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, to secure expeditious access to justice, and to provide fair and adequate redress for victims; [adopted ad ref]

Paragraph 56 translates into a demand for punishment of the cartoonists and Geert Wilders, with legislation allowing Muslims to sue them for “damages”.

57. 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 fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance worldwide;

Paragraph 57 shows us how clever the OIC thinks they are;. giving faint praise before wielding their sword.


59. Urges States to punish violent, racist and xenophobic activities by groups that are based on neo-Nazi, neo-Fascist and other violent national ideologies; [adopted ad ref]

Paragraph 59 is obviously a coded attack upon the Dutch Freedom Party and a similar party in Belgium.


66. Calls upon States to ensure that any measures taken in the fight against terrorism are implemented in full respect of all human rights, in particular the principle of non-discrimination and in this context urges all Member-States to implement relevant provisions of the General Assembly resolutions 60/288 and 62/272;

Paragraph 66 is a coded condemnation of our half hearted attempts at homeland security subsequent to 9/11.


67. 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;

Paragraph 67 is redundant; restating paragraph 12 above.


68. 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;

Paragraph 68 is redundant, restating paragraph 12 above.


98. 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;

If paragraph 98 were sincere and enforced, Islam would be outlawed.


101. Calls upon States not to resort to profiling founded on grounds of discrimination prohibited by international law, including on racial, ethnic, and religious grounds and prohibit it by law;

Paragraph 101 is redundant, restating paragraph 66.


133. Takes note of the proposal of the OHCHR, in cooperation with regional stakeholders in all parts of the world, to organize as a follow-up to 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;

Art. 19 of ICCPR declares rights to “hold opinions without interference” & “freedom of expression” and outlines certain limitations thereon. Art. 20 prohibits “propaganda for war” and “advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence”.

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.

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: