Clinton: Ways to Fight Religious Intolerance

A Bloomberg article by Nicole Gaouette exemplifies the fine art of turning a press conference into "news" without scratching the surface to discover relevant facts.  Use the link below to read the entire article, I am taking exemplary excerpts out of context.

Clinton Works With Allies on Ways to Fight Religious Intolerance

By Nicole Gaouette - Jul 15, 2011

The U.S. and allies are seeking better responses to acts of religious intolerance such as burnings of the Koran and cartoons that mock theProphet Muhammad.

Define "acts of religious intolerance".  How does burning a Koran after a four hour mock trial equate to burning churches with the congregants inside?   How do the Motoons equate to telling Christians to leave their homes or die? 

    Exactly why should we tolerate intolerance?  Islam curses us, lets tolerate it. 

• 2:89...So let the Curse of Allâh be on the disbelievers. 
• 2:159. Verily, those who conceal the clear proofs, evidences and the guidance, which We have sent down, after We have made it clear for the people in the Book, they are the ones cursed by Allâh and cursed by the cursers. 
• 2:161. Verily, those who disbelieve, and die while they are disbelievers, it is they on whom is the Curse of Allâh and of the angels and of mankind, combined. 
• 98:6. Verily, those who disbelieve (in the religion of Islâm, the Qur'ân and Prophet Muhammad ()) from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and Al-Mushrikûn will abide in the Fire of Hell. They are the worst of creatures.

    Exactly why should we tolerate incitement & incentivization of violence against us?  Islam declares war on us, lets tolerate it.

• 8:60. And make ready against them all you can of power, including steeds of war (tanks, planes, missiles, artillery, etc.) to threaten the enemy of Allâh and your enemy, and others besides whom, you may not know but whom Allâh does know. And whatever you shall spend in the Cause of Allâh shall be repaid unto you, and you shall not be treated unjustly. 
• 8:65. O Prophet (Muhammad )! Urge the believers to fight. If there are twenty steadfast persons amongst you, they will overcome two hundred, and if there be a hundred steadfast persons they will overcome a thousand of those who disbelieve, because they (the disbelievers) are people who do not understand. 
• 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. You desire the good of this world (i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives), but Allâh desires (for you) the Hereafter. And Allâh is All-Mighty, All-Wise.
• 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. 
• 9:120. It was not becoming of the people of Al-Madinah and the bedouins of the neighbourhood to remain behind Allâh's Messenger (Muhammad  when fighting in Allâh's Cause) and (it was not becoming of them) to prefer their own lives to his life. That is because they suffer neither thirst nor fatigue, nor hunger in the Cause of Allâh, nor they take any step to raise the anger of disbelievers nor inflict any injury upon an enemy but is written to their credit as a deed of righteousness. Surely, Allâh wastes not the reward of the Muhsinûn

  9:121. Nor do they spend anything (in Allâh's Cause) - small or great - nor cross a valley, but is written to their credit, that Allâh may recompense them with the best of what they used to do (i.e. Allâh will reward their good deeds according to the reward of their best deeds which they did in the most perfect manner). 

Why stop with toleration; lets all convert to a "great religion" that rewards any step taken to injure or enrage a disbeliever. 

    Why should there be any governmental response to Koran burning or cartoons?  Aren't there some more pressing and substantive problems requiring immediate attention?     

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton discussed with religious and political leaders today in Istanbul how to build on a United Nations Human Rights Council resolution passed March 24, which calls for promoting tolerance and respect for diversity of beliefs, without restricting legitimate free speech.

    Those who write about UN resolutions would do well to read them before reaching for their keyboards. 

1. Expresses deep concern at the continued serious instances of derogatory
stereotyping, negative profiling and stigmatization of persons based on their religion or
beliefs, as well as programmes and agendas pursued by extremist organizations and groups
aimed at creating and perpetuating negative stereotypes about religious groups, in particular
when condoned by Governments;

2. Expresses its concern that incidents of religious intolerance, discrimination
and related violence, as well as of negative stereotyping of individuals on the basis of
religion or belief continue to rise around the world, and condemns, in this context, any
advocacy of religious hatred against individuals that constitutes incitement to
discrimination, hostility or violence, and urges States to take effective measures, as set forth
in this resolution, consistent with their obligations under international human rights law, to
address and combat such incidents;

3. Condemns any advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to
discrimination, hostility or violence, whether it involves the use of print, audio-visual or
electronic media or any other means;
...

(f) Adopting measures to criminalize incitement to imminent violence based on
religion or belief;

Exactly what do those high sounding, apparently innocuous phrases mean?  What is their real world application?  For the answer, we must turn to the immortal words of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon who condemned Fitna as "hate speech" & "incitement", declaring that Geert Wilders had no right to express it.

Reuters quotes U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon about Fitna:"There is no justification for hate speech or incitement to violence," Ban said in a statement. "The right of free expression is not at stake here."

According to the Secretary General, there is no justification for demonstrating the nexus between Islamic doctrine and practice.  This is the equivalent of an organization of snakes lobbying to prohibit lifting rocks.

But all the pressure is off, the HRC has turned a new leaf, abandoning the campaign to criminalize criticism of Islam.  Yeah, right.  Pakistan's U.N. Ambassador had remarks on the resolution March 24, 2011.  I took it apart in detail here:  http://islamexposed.blogspot.com/2011/04/oic-islamic-hypocrisy-on-parade.html

The new resolution supplements & confirms but does not supplant earlier resolutions neither does it preclude further resolutions of the same kind.

Mr. President: this resolution addresses a number of issues¹ over which the OIC has been expressing concern over the years. having said  that, I wish to state categorically that this resolution does not replace earlier resolutions on combating  defamation.² which were adopted by the Human Rights Council  and remain valid.  This resolution L.38  is an attempt on the part of the oic to build consensus³ on an issue of vital importance not only to Muslims but to people of all religions  and beliefs by identifying  ways and means to deal with the growing problems of religious incitement⁴ and discrimination and incitement to hatred⁵ and violence⁶ based on religion or belief.

Amb. Akhram was not the only one to speak to this issue. He was joined by the Secretary General of the OIC.

OIC has a principled postition against defamation of any
 religion, dehumanization of the followers or denigration of
 symbols    sacred    to    all     religions.    The    developments                                              `
 including the ban of construction of minarets, the attempts
 towards burning of Quran and the use of Islamophobia as
 an instrument of electoral politics are ominous.  There is an
 urgent need to initiate and sustain what I would like to term
 as    'preventive   cultural    diplomacy'.   We   need   to    move
 beyond   event   based   calls   for   action   to   create   spaces   for
 structured   engagement.    The   Human   Rights   framework
 provides   with   a   concrete   basis   for   this   engagement.   We
 believe that tbe workshops on incitement to hatred under
 the Durban mandate constitute and important avenue for a
 synthesis  aimed at bridging the divergence of views.
http://www.eyeontheun.org/assets/attachments/documents/9429hrc16sessionoic.pdf  page 9

Human rights belong to individual humans, not to collectives neither to institutions.  Is there a right to be completely shielded from all criticism & questioning?  Is there an absolute right to have anyone who criticizes your cherished beliefs thrown into prison?

    I have a clue for you; a clue which few others will share. Reliance of the Traveller is the handbook of Shaffi'ite fiqh, the most widely accepted version of Shari'ah. It imposes the death penalty for apostasy, which it defines with a list of twenty acts & attitudes.

• 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.

• O8.7: Acts that Entail Leaving Islam

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

• -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;

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

• -16- to revile the religion of Islam

Now what is it the OIC & HRC seek to criminalize? 

aiming to implement responses to defamation that includes education, government outreach and dialogue rather than restrictive measures.

They want to substitute indoctrination for education.  "Dialogue": form over substance. Do any of those dialogues include detailed discussion of the Koran verses quoted above, Ibn Kathir's exegesis of them or Muhammad's excellent example of how to implement them?  Just one did, March 20, in Florida, the UN & Department of State condemn the outcome of that four hour dialogue, which was conducted in Arabic.

“Together, we have begun to address the false divide that pits religious sensitivities against freedom of expression,” Clinton said today.

What false divide?  Islam and the HRC declare that Islam is a protected person, to be shielded from all criticism, which is to be criminalized; its perpetrators to be punished by fines and imprisonment.   Ban Ki-Moon denied  Wilders' right to publish Fitna.  A Dutch panel of jurists reached a different conclusion.

She noted that even as countries in the Middle East and North Africa make the “inspiring” transition to democracy, there has also been a rise in ethnic and religious intolerance.

Secretary of State Clinton draws inspiration from strange places and events; from bloody insurrection which exchanges one tyrant for another.  There is no democracy in Islam and can be none because only Allah and his regent, followed by the latter's successors, have the right to rule. 

Clinton said the Human Rights Council’s resolution “calls upon states to protect freedom of religion, to counter offensive expression through education, interfaith dialogue, and public debate, and to prohibit discrimination, profiling, and hate crimes, but not to criminalize speech unless there is an incitement to imminent violence.”

How do you define & measure incitement?  What did Ban say about Fitna?  Who is to gainsay his definition & metrication?  Fitna is not incitement, it exposes incitement. Politicians are too dishonest to acknowledge the difference. 

In the United States, Clinton said, “we have seen how the incendiary actions of just a very few people” can create “wide ripples of intolerance.”

How is anyone to make sense of such ambiguous and amorphous expressions?  My first response is to assume that "incendiary actions" is a reference  to  9/11/01; the "very few" to the "Magnificent 19"  and the "wide ripples of intolerance" is a reference to increased awareness of and public expression about the damnable doctrines & practices of Islam.   They could as easily be applied to the Koran burning and riots in Pakistan.

...protecting the rights of all people to worship as they choose, and to use some old-fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming so that people don’t feel that they have the support to do what we abhor,” she said.

Is there a right to worship as they choose, when war is their cheif sacrament?  How is it possible that there is a right to fight disbelievers until they are subjugated?  How is it possible that there is a right to fight disbelievers until only Allah is worshiped?   How is it possible that there is a right to make "great slaughter"; to take "any step" to "injure" or "raise the anger of" disbelievers? 

    Obedience to Allah and emulation of Muhammad  are foundational to and inseverable from the practice of Islam.  What do believers do? C;inton has no clue; I have one for her.

• 9:111. Verily, Allâh has purchased of the believers their lives and their properties; for the price that theirs shall be the Paradise. They fight in Allâh's Cause, so they kill (others) and are killed. It is a promise in truth which is binding on Him in the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel) and the Qur'ân. And who is truer to his covenant than Allâh? Then rejoice in the bargain which you have concluded. That is the supreme success . 

What do believers do? They wage war and kill disbelievers; war is a primary sacrament of Islam. Am I cherry picking?

• 49:15. Only those are the believers who have believed in Allâh and His Messenger, and afterward doubt not but strive with their wealth and their lives for the Cause of Allâh. Those! They are the truthful.

 Of course, that must be an anachronism. Yeah, right.

• Sunan Abu Dawud Book 14, Number 2526

  
      Narrated Anas ibn Malik:

      The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Three things are the roots of faith: to refrain from (killing) a person who utters, "There is no god but Allah" and not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits, and not to excommunicate him from Islam for his any action; and jihad will be performed continuously since the day Allah sent me as a prophet until the day the last member of my community will fight with the Dajjal (Antichrist). The tyranny of any tyrant and the justice of any just (ruler) will not invalidate it. One must have faith in Divine decree.

Jihad continues until the last day. Exactly what is this holy sacrament of Islam?

• O9.0: Jihad

  (O: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada signifying warfare to establish the religion.

• O9.1 ...

• If none of those concerned perform jihad, and it does not happen at all, then everyone who is aware that it is obligatory is guilty of sin, if there was a possibility of having performed it. In the time of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) jihad was a communal obligation after his emigration (hijra) to Medina. As for subsequent times, there are two possible states in respect to non-Muslims.

  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. ...

Does any sane person desire to promote tolerance of a war cult which seeks to destroy or enslave and dominate us?  Does any sane person advocate a right to wage war against us, to kill us, seize our property, rape our widows and sell our orphans into slavery?   For the deluded fools who believe that it is possible to practice Islam peacefully, I present one more hadith. Get a clue, for Chrissake.

• Sunun Abu Dawud Book 23, Number 3455:

  Narrated Abdullah ibn Umar:

  I heard the Apostle of Allah, (peace_be_upon_him) say: 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.

Jihad is war; their "original religion".  Commerce & agriculture are alternatives to jihad: it iss economic; its mission is mercenary. If Muslims abandon it they will be cursed until they resume it.  If you can not comprehend this clue, you are probably too stupid to live, do the world a service by removing yourself from the gene pool.

Sphere: Related Content

Mooned Again

The News Mail reports that U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has demanded the lifting of Israel's blockade of Gaza.
A few choice quotes:

"Everything must be done to prevent another incident of this kind,"

"All concerned should act with a sense of care and responsibility, and in accordance with international law."

Why did you allow the first incident? Why did you not send diplomats to stop the launch of the flotilla? Why did you fail to send international forces to turn those boats back?

International law says that Israel has a right to enforce a blockade against her belligerent enemies. Sending that flotilla was an act of provocation, by design; the obvious intent was to obtain a propaganda advantage against Israel. Israel warned the flotilla, directing them to turn back or divert to a port for inspection. Instead of complying, the provocateurs refused to divert and persisted in their attempt to break the blockade.


The Secretary General's office has a transcript, which I have gleaned for these quotes.

At this sensitive time, it is essential to avoid provocations.

It was essential to avoid provocations at the time of the flotilla's launching. You stood by wringing your hands.

This tragedy only highlights the serious underlying problem. The long-running closure imposed on the Gaza Strip is counter-productive, unsustainable and wrong. It punishes innocent civilians. It must be lifted by the Israeli authorities immediately.

Israel's blockade is not the problem. The problem is Islam's demonic demand for politicide & genocide. Islam will never tolerate the existence of Israel. Her recovery of a tiny fragment of her ancient patrimony proves Allah to be an impotent idol. No Muslim can accept that. That blockade is the only tool Israel has to slow the flow of weapons and the raw materials for making them, into Gaza.

Speaking more broadly, we must advance the proximity talks facilitated by the United States. Despite the latest developments, it is vital for the talks to continue.

No amount of talking will solve the basic problem: Islamic intolerance and aggression. There are only two possible solutions, choose one.

1. Break the faith of the Muslims, cause them to abandon Islam.
2. Move them beyond rocket range of Israel. Hell might be far enough.

This week's events underscore the urgency of real progress in the Middle East peace process. I commend President Abbas's courageous decision to continue, and Arab partners for their flexibility.

Courageous decision to do what? To make outrageous, escalating demands without ever meeting any of Fallestine's existing commitments. They still inculcate hatred in their children. They still broadcast incitement in their mass media. They still glorify terrorists. The only thing any reasonable person has to say to them is "go to Hell". As long as they want genocide and politicide, there will be no peace.

Intelligent and rational people look beneath the surface, for the actual roots of this existential conflict. Those roots are in Islam's cannon of scripture, tradition & exegeses.

• 9:29
• 7:167
• Sahih Bukhari 4.53.392
• Sunan Abu Dawud 14.2477
• Sahih Muslim 41.6985
• 13:41
• 40:51
• 8:66
• 8:39
• 9:39
• 61:10-13

Allah commanded Muslims to wage war against Jews. He said that he would continually send someone to torment the Jews. Moe said that he owned the earth and wished to expel the Jews. He said that Allah had, on his account, taken special interest in the Levant and made its conquest a high priority. He told the Muslims that they could not enter Paradise until they complete the genocide of the Jews.

Allah promised the Muslims that he would give them dominion over the world. He promised victory. He promised them a 2:1 kill ratio, that they would overcome armies twice their size. Israel's continued existence after several existential attacks proves Allah to be an impotent idol. That is something Muslims can not tolerate. They can never allow Israel to live in peace no matter what concessions she might make.

Allah commanded Muslims to conquer and subjugate the entire world. he threatened them with eternal damnation if they refuse. He promised them eternal bliss in the celestial bordello if they make the effort.

The feeble minded mental midgets we elected to bring peace to the world, keep this nation safe, and those Israel elected to keep her safe are incapable of connecting the data points and discovering the obvious conclusion: that peace is impossible so long as Muslims believe in and attempt to implement Allah's commandments.

As Secretary-General, I stand ready to take any necessary action, and will continue my personal engagement to contribute to a resolution of the conflict.

If that was said with any sincerity, you would sit down and shut up without making any of those annoyingly stupid statements. Instead, you would begin a crusade to eliminate Islam from the face of the earth.

Memri has a video clip of a pep rally aboard the flotilla. The terrorists were chanting a reminder of the conquest of Khaibar. At the end of the clip, one woman declares that they will have one of two good outcomes: martyrdom or Gaza.

Bare Naked Islam has a slide show of weapons taken from militants on the flotilla please take a close look at it and read the accompanying text. This video, which I found in that same post, shows the terrorists preparing to receive the Israeli boarding party. Note the gas masks, rods and slingshots.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZlSSaPT_OU&feature=player_embedded

Another post at BNI has a video of the attack.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6sAEYpHF24&feature=player_embedded

This one is mainly audio & sub titles.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFGuwUGaI9o&feature=player_embedded

Another BNI post has video of the attack. If you have any respect for Obama, Clinton & Moon after watching this, you are morally defective; the world would be better off without you.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaiMjAULWn0&feature=player_embedded

The U.N. is part of the problem, not part of the solution; we need to Quit the U.N. Get the U.S.A. out of the U.N. and vice versa!!!

Sphere: Related Content

U.S.A. vs Durban Declaration

A press release distributed by Press Zoom appears to be taken from the records of the Third Committee, describing the debate and voting on several resolutions before the committee.

Those resolutions included the five-part draft text on global efforts for the total elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and the comprehensive implementation of and follow-up to the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action ( document A/C.3/64/L.54/Rev.1 ), which was introduced by the representative of Sudan, on behalf of the Group of 77 and China.

32. Calls upon all States, in accordance with the commitments undertaken in paragraph 147 of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action,1 to take all necessary measures to combat incitement to violence motivated by racial hatred,
including through the misuse of print, audio-visual and electronic media and new communication technologies, and, in collaboration with service providers, to promote the use of such technologies, including the Internet to contribute to the fight against racism, in conformity with international standards of freedom of expression and taking all necessary measures to guarantee that right;

33. Encourages all States to include in their educational curricula and social programmes at all levels, as appropriate, knowledge of and tolerance and respect for all cultures, civilizations, religions, peoples and countries, as well as information on the follow-up to and implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action; [Emphasis added.]

Paragraph 32 quoted above is aimed directly at all criticism of Islam. Its practical implementation is best illustrated by the words of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.

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.” [Emphasis added for clarity.]

The man chiefly responsible for enforcing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights asserts that there is no right to tell the truth about Islam. Fitna is not hate speech nor is it incitement; it accurately depicts Islamic hate speech and incitement. The pending trial of Geert Wilders on charges of hate speech is a prime example of the violation of freedom of expression intended by the sponsors of this resolution.

Paragraph 33 encourages turning our schools into instruments of propaganda & indoctrination, bordering on proselytizing. It is impossible for an informed and rational person to tolerate or respect Islam because Islam is supremely intolerant and denies our rights and dignity in addition to declaring perpetual war against us.

Speaking in explanation of vote before the vote, the representative of the United States said his country was deeply committed to fighting racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance at home and abroad. Its founding commitment to the principle that all people were created equal was manifested in its own legislation and its work around the world. Among other things, the United States had, in October, presented an action plan during the meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee on the elaboration of complementary standards. [Emphasis added for clarity.]

The bold faced clause is composed of three code phrases for 'Islamophobia'. The preliminary meeting to prepare for the Durban II Racism Conference redefined racism to include criticism of Islam.

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; [Emphasis added for clarity, spelling original.]

Obamanation is "deeply committed to fighting" criticism of Islam. Their whining about freedom of expression is a smoke screen to cover their actual intent: to silence all criticism of Islam and the regime's Socialist agenda.

He said the United States had been unable to support the Durban Review Conference because it supported the 2001 World Conference, in toto. The United States was deeply concerned about hateful speech, but did not agree that the best way to combat such speech was by its prohibition. Rather, the United States believed an effective approach was based on three key elements, including robust legal protections against hate crimes, outreach to religious groups and vigorous defence of freedom of expression. It regretted having to vote “no” on this text and looked forward to working together with the international community. It remained deeply committed to ongoing, thoughtful dialogue on combating racism and racial discrimination. [Emphasis added for clarity, spelling original.]

"Hateful speech" is code for any negative expression about Islam, including Fitna: and the Danish Cartoons. Notice that the regime is concerned about the outcome: silencing all criticism, they seek an "effective approach", a method that will result in silence.

"Hate crimes": if any expression should be criminalized, that is the one. Assaulting, killing or harassing anyone is a crime, regardless of the victim's identity, religion, gender, etc. There is no group of persons more deserving of protection than any other.

"Outreach to religious groups" is code for pandering to Islam, submitting to its outrageous demands. Islam's most outrageous demand is that we submit and become Muslims. We might as well be bitten by Dracula and become vampires. Islamic law forbids any and all negative expression about Allah, Moe, the Qur'an & the laws they issued. If you doubt this, open Reliance of the Traveller to O8.7 and read the list of acts which entail leaving Islam, the penalty for which is death (O8.2). For the law's applicability to non-Muslims, see O11.10(5).

Far from being a saintly Prophet, Moe was a pedophile who married the six year old daughter of his best friend. He solicited the murder of critics. He was guilty of genocide; preaching and practicing it.

Far from being a "great religion of peace", Islam is a mercenary war cult, contrived for the purpose of enriching and empowering its founder by perpetuating war so that he could accrue the spoils.

Islam's objective in demanding blasphemy laws & censorship is to disarm us in the war of ideas so that, in the words of George Washington, "dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter".

If you are a lover of liberty and the rights ensured by the Bill of Rights, then do your part to preserve them by signing and propagating these petitions. Send their links to everyone you can hope to influence with an exhortation to sign and forward them.

• Free to Believe
• ACLJ
• International Qur'an Petition
  

Sphere: Related Content

Defamation of Religions Draft 10-29-09

United Nations A/C.3/64/L.27 Combating defamation of religions tabled in the third committee. by Belarus, Syrian Arab Republic* and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of):
{A/C.3/64/L.28 Combating defamation of religions is embargoed, I can not determine if it is a competing draft or whether it is related in any way. }

*for the OIC.
The draft resolution is in the form of a 7 page, 56kb pdf consisting of an enumerated list of 25 items, the substantial parts begin on page 2.

Since Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in remarks introducing the current Religious Freedom Report, rejected the concept of defamation of religions and accepted the concept of negative stereotyping:

Now, some claim that the best way to protect the freedom of religion is to implement so-called anti-defamation policies that would restrict freedom of expression and the freedom of religion. I strongly disagree. The United States will always seek to counter negative stereotypes of individuals based on their religion and will stand against discrimination and persecution.

I will begin with references to those concepts.

Defamation occurs twelve times in the draft resolution, beginning with the title.

Stressing that the defamation of religions is a serious affront to human dignity leading to the illicit restriction of the freedom of religion of their adherents and incitement to religious hatred and violence,

That section implies a cause : effect relationship between defamation of religions, restriction of freedom & hatred and violence. Did Christians who viewed the Danish Cartoons subsequently assault Muslims and destroy their property as a result?

Stressing also the need to effectively combat defamation of all religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general,

How do they plan to combat the defamation of Judaism and Christianity in the Qur'an wherein Allah expresses anger toward us, curses us and declares perpetual war against us? Is that really part of their program of action?

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

"Inaction of some states" is a vague term; what does it mean? Is it a reference to Denmark allowing publication of the cartoons and Holland allowing the publication of Fitna? What discrimination against Muslims resulted from those publications?

...sessions, in which the Special Rapporteur highlighted the serious nature of the defamation of all religions and the need to complement legal strategies...

"Legal strategies" is a reference to national and international legislation to criminalize criticism of Islam.

5. Notes with deep concern the intensification of the overall campaign of the defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general, including the ethnic and religious profiling of Muslim minorities in the aftermath of the tragic events of 11 September 2001;

"Overall campaign of the defamation of religions" ; is one single source defaming more than one religion and inciting religious hatred? Where is religious hatred incited other than in Mosques Madrassas and the state run media of Islamic nations where Jihad against Jews & Christians is preached? Was it Muslims or Mormons who perpetrated that attack and those in London & Madrid? Because Muslims perpetrated those attacks and others in the name of Allah, we are unable to trust Muslims. Failure to profile would be suicidal.

6. Recognizes that, in the context of the fight against terrorism, defamation of religions and incitement to religious hatred in general become aggravating factors that contribute to the denial of fundamental rights and freedoms of members of target groups, as well as their economic and social exclusion;

Does anyone else recognize the non sequitur in that item?

8. Reiterates the commitment of all States to the implementation, in an integrated manner, of the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, which was adopted without a vote by the General Assembly on 8 September 200614 and reaffirmed by the Assembly in its resolution 62/272 of 5 September 2008, and which clearly confirms, inter alia, that terrorism cannot and should not be associated with any religion, nationality, civilization or ethnic group, stressing the need to reinforce the international community’s commitment to promote a culture of peace, justice and human development, ethnic, national and religious tolerance, and respect for all religions, religious values, beliefs or cultures and prevent the defamation of religions; [Emphasis added.]

Take a good long look at the emphasized clause in item 8. Terrorism is associated with Islam because it is an intrinsic sacrament of Islam, sanctified & exemplified in the Qur'an and confirmed in Moe's sunnah.

• 3:151 We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve, because they joined others in worship with Allâh, for which He had sent no authority; their abode will be the Fire and how evil is the abode of the Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrong­doers).
• 8:12 (Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels, "Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes."
• 33:26 And those of the people of the Scripture who backed them (the disbelievers) Allâh brought them down from their forts and cast terror into their hearts, (so that) a group (of them) you killed, and a group (of them) you made captives.
• And He caused you to inherit their lands, and their houses, and their riches, and a land which you had not trodden (before). And Allâh is Able to do all things.
• Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220:
  Narrated Abu Huraira:
  
  Allah's Apostle said, "I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand." Abu Huraira added: Allah's Apostle has left the world and now you, people, are bringing out those treasures (i.e. the Prophet did not benefit by them).

But we must not say or write that: to do so constitutes "defamation", "negative stereotyping", and " incitement to religious hatred & violence", according to the OIC and their factotums at the UN. Debate must be closed and silence imposed by law, even of truthful expressions which expose Islam's intrinsic evils.

Does anyone recognize the subsequent non sequitur? Promoting tolerance for the intolerable does not promote peace or justice. Islam is infamous because of its own canonical texts and its continuing history of rapine. Peace & justice would be promoted by recognizing and eliminating aggressive evil.

15. Urges all States to provide, within their respective legal and constitutional systems, adequate protection against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from the defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general;

Item 15 asserts that accurate description of the doctrines and practices of Islam incites hatred, intimidation & coercion. It demands the passage & enforcement of national laws to prevent & punish truthful criticism of Islam, including Fitna and this blog post.

17. Welcomes the recent steps taken by Member States to protect freedom of religion through the enactment or strengthening of domestic frameworks and legislations to prevent the defamation of religions and the negative stereotyping of religious groups;

19. Underscores the need to combat defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general, by strategizing and harmonizing actions at the local, national, regional and international levels through education and awareness-raising, and urges all States to ensure equal access to education for all, in law and in practice, including access to free primary education for all children, both girls and boys, and access for adults to lifelong learning and education based on respect for human rights, diversity and tolerance, without discrimination of any kind, and to refrain from any legal or other measures leading to racial segregation in access to schooling;

To make item 19 honest, indoctrination should be substituted for "education".

25. Requests the Secretary-General to submit a report on the implementation of the present resolution, including on the possible correlation between defamation of religions and the upsurge in incitement, intolerance and hatred in many parts of the world, to the General Assembly at its sixty-fifth session.

Negative stereotyping occurs three times.

2. Expresses deep concern at the negative stereotyping of religions and manifestations of intolerance and discrimination in matters of religion or belief still evident in the world;

They are concerned about Fitna & similar videos, the Danish Cartoons and blog posts which expose Islamic doctrines which sanctify and mandate genocidal warfare & terrorism.

17. Welcomes the recent steps taken by Member States to protect freedom of religion through the enactment or strengthening of domestic frameworks and legislations to prevent the defamation of religions and the negative stereotyping of religious groups;

Truthful exposure of Islamic doctrines & practices does not diminish freedom of religion. Where Allah's writ runs, as in Egypt, Pakistan & Saudi Arabia, Islam diminishes freedom of religion.

23. Welcomes the initiative by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the expert seminar on freedom of expression and advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, on 2 and 3 October 2008, and requests the High Commissioner to continue to build on this initiative, with a view to concretely contributing to the prevention and elimination of all such forms of incitement and the consequences of negative stereotyping of religions or beliefs, and their adherents, on the human rights of those individuals and their communities;

According to the OIC and their UN factotums, Fitna and the Danish Cartoons are advocacy of religious hatred constituting incitement of violence. The Cartoons depicted Moe as a terrorist, which, by his own admission, he was. Fitna exposed the relationship between Allah's Jihad imperatives, the hatred preached by Muslim clerics and the violence done by their congregants. In reality, that is not defamation neither is it negative stereotyping nor is it incitement.

The draft resolution is a demand for national and international enforcement of Islam's blasphemy law, which punishes any negative statement about Allah, his messenger or his book with death.

Reliance of the Traveller’s Book O [Justice]. O8.7 lists 20 things that entail apostasy. Here are a few relevant items in that list.

-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;

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

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

-16- to revile the religion of Islam;

-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). )

Another provision prescribes the penalty.

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.

One of the rules applied to dhimmis is equally instructive. What is impermissible to say about Allah or Moe? According to previously quoted statements, it is impermissible to link Islamic violence with Islamic scripture & tradition.

O11.10

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

-3- leads a Muslim away from Islam;

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

The passage of these Defamation of Religion resolutions gives an unwarranted aura of legitimacy to the blasphemy laws enforced in Pakistan and other Islamic countries. Those laws are frequently used to persecute innocent victims, including indigenous Christians, converts to Christianity and missionaries.

Canadian, British, Australian and European critics of Islam have been persecuted, jailed and fined for truthful expressions about Islam. The policy of the Obama administration places our First Amendment right of free expression at risk. The Secretary of State condemns the defamation clauses but supports those alleging negative stereotyping. Both clauses have the same effect: criminalizing accurate description of Islamic doctrines and practices.

We must therefore resist and counter attack. Please sign, support and publicize the following on line petitions.

• International Qur'an Petition
• Free to Believe
• ACLJ

For a long list of links to previous resolutions, related documents and blog posts, refer to Defamation of Religions: Background Info.

External References in the resolution: superscripts refer to footnotes in the draft resolution.

• ¹ICERD
• ²ICCPR
• For detailed documentation of how Islamic doctrines violate these international covenants, refer to Islam vs Human Rights 64kb chm file compiled from 7 blog posts.
• ³Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief
• ⁴Declaration on the Human Rights of Individuals Who are not Nationals of the Country in which They Live
• ⁵Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities,
• Recalling the relevant resolutions of the Commission on Human Rights and the Human Rights Council in this regard,
• None specified; assuming the reference is to previous defamation resolutions.
• E/CN.4/1999/167
• E/CN.4/2005/135
• E/CN.4/2004/127
• E/CN.4/2002/200
• E/CN.4/2001/167
• E/CN.4/2000/167
• A/HRC/4/123
• A/C.3/60/L.29
• A/RES/60/150
• A/RES/61/164
• A/RES/63/171
• A/C.3/60/SR.45
• A/HRC/4/123
• A/HRC/12/L.l4/Rev
• ⁶United Nations Millenium Declaration
• ⁷Durban Declaration A/CONF.189/12
• Durban Declaration - A/CONF.189/12 Chapter I - UN Documents
• ⁸Outcome Document of the Durban Review Conference, held in Geneva in April 2009 A/CONF.211/8
• ⁹Taking note of the reports of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance
• A/HRC/4/19
• A/HRC/6/6
• A/HRC/9/12
• A/HRC/12/38
• ¹⁰Global Agenda for Dialogue among Civilizations, A/RES/56/6
• ¹¹Declaration and Programme of Action adopted by the Ministerial Meeting on Human Rights and Cultural Diversity of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, held in Tehran on 3 and 4 September 2007 A/62/464, annex.
• ¹²A/62/18
• CERD/C/63/CO/11, para. 20 (10 December2003)
• CERD/C/63/CO/6, para. 14 (10 December 2003)
• CERD/C/NGA/CO/18, para. 20 (1 November 2005)
• CERD/C/TZA/CO/16, para. 20 (1 November 2005)
• CERD/C/IRL/CO/2,para. 18 (14 April 2005)
• CERD/C/RUS/CO/19, paras. 16 and 17 (20 August 2008)
• resolution 63/171 of 18 December 2008
• ¹³report of the Secretary-General A/64/209
• ¹⁴United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, A/RES/60/288 General Assembly
• ¹⁵general recommendation XV (42) of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (A/48/18), chap. VIII, sect. B.
• ¹⁶World Programme for Human Rights Education proclaimed by the General Assembly on 10 December 2004 resolutions 59/113 A and B.

Sphere: Related Content

Defamation of Religions: Background Info.

In remarks about the pending Defamation of Religions resolution, Professor Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Conference, said this.

"It is important to note that passage of these resolutions by a majority vote beyond the membership of the OIC lends international legitimacy to the OIC position on this issue,"

That confirms the obvious: passing defamation resolutions legitimizes Islam's malicious malarkey. Lets drill down to the crucial details.

In his introduction to the OIC Observatory on Islamophobia, March 31 '08, Professor Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Conference, had this to say about Islamophobia.

The Muslim Ummah has noticed with utmost concern the continued attacks by a section of marginal groups and individuals in the West on the most sacred symbols of Islam including the Holy Quran and Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) in an offensive and denigrating manner, the most recent being the reprints of the blasphemous cartoons by 17 Danish newspapers on February 13, 2008 and the release of the film Fitna by a Dutch Parliamentarian on March 27, 2008. This apart, Muslims continue to be stereotyped, discriminated and profiled in many Western countries that have contributed to the issue. [Emphasis added.]

Notice that the argument begins with an ad hominem argument: "marginal groups and individuals". Ihsanoglu slapped a "marginal" label on the cartoonists and Geert Wilders. Note that the cartoons are labeled "blasphemous". Is that label deserved? In the cartoons, Moe is depicted as a terrorist; is that blasphemy if the depiction is true? Consider what codified Islamic oral tradition tells us about the matter.

• Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month's journey. [Sahih Bukhari 1.7.331]
• I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy) [Sahih Bukhari 4.52.220] [Emphasis added.]

The cartoons exaggerate, because Moe never possessed a bomb, but they are they blasphemy if their message is true?

Fitna is described as an attack on the Holy Quran because it displayed verses which incite violence, demonstrated their use in kutbah and displayed images of the results. Refer to Fitna: Supporting Documentation for documentation of the Qur'an verses used in Fitna and Wilders' address to the Dutch Parliament. Is truthful speech blasphemy?

CNN reported on remarks by the OIC and other Muslims and included a quote from Ban Ki-moon.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon condemned the film, calling it "offensively anti-Islamic" while urging calm.

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

Ban Ki-Moon labeled Fitna hate speech and incitement to violence, but the hate speech, incitement & violence depicted in the documentary came from the pens, tongues & hands of Muslims, not from Geert Wilders, his narrative is objective and accurate.

Payvand's Iran News reported on remarks by the OIC General Secretary.

"The film was a deliberate act of discrimination against Muslims" that aimed to "provoke unrest and intolerance,"

Pakistan, which frequently introduces the OIC resolutions to the General Assembly and Human Rights Council, was also quoted.

Pakistan said it told the Dutch ambassador that it was incumbent on the Netherlands to prosecute Wilders for defamation and deliberately hurting Muslim sentiments, according to IRNA reporter in Islamabad.

Islam wanted Wilders prosecuted for defamation of Islam. In a few months, he will be defending himself before a Dutch tribunal. The OIC's resolutions seek the persecution of all who criticize Islam.

Examine the remarks of Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu to the OIC Council of Foreign Ministers in Uganda, June '08.

Fourth: The level of the OIC Islamophobia Observatory, which we have established in order to monitor and document all manifestation of this scourge, and to deal with them in an interactive manner.

Taken together, this plan has proven its merit and we have been able to achieve convincing progress at all these levels mainly the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, and the UN General Assembly.

The United Nations General Assembly adopted similar resolutions against the defamation of Islam.

In confronting the Danish cartoons and the Dutch film “Fitna”, we sent a clear message to the West regarding the red lines that should not be crossed. As we speak, the official West and its public opinion are all now well-aware of the sensitivities of these issues. They have also started to look seriously into the question of freedom of expression from the perspective of its inherent responsibility, which should not be overlooked.

The Ten Year Plan proved its merit with the passage of defamation resolutions by the UN. Note the mention of "red lines that should not be crossed"; that is a thinly veiled threat of physical violence. Does anyone remember what happened to the film maker Theo van Gogh? In the last sentence of the quote, freedom of expression is mentioned, an obvious reference to the terms of limitation used in the resolutions.

What accounts for Islam's extreme sensitivity to criticism? We can find the answer in Islamic law: Reliance of the Traveller's Book O [Justice]. O8.7 lists 20 things that entail apostasy. Here are a few relevant items in that list.

-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;

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

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

-16- to revile the religion of Islam;

-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). )

One of the rules applied to dhimmis is equally instructive. What is impermissible to say about Allah or Moe? According to previously quoted statements, it is impermissible to link Islamic violence with Islamic scripture & tradition.

O11.10

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

-3- leads a Muslim away from Islam;

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

The penalty for apostasy is death [O8.2]. Remember the fatwa against Salman Rushdie and the reward offered for killing him? In a recent protest against Geert Wilders visiting England, Muslims displayed signs saying "Freedom Go To Hell" and "Islam Will Dominate.".

If we are to have an honest and open debate about domestic, foreign and military policies affecting our national security, we must be able to discuss Islam's fundamental nature and the relationship between the orthodox doctrines expressed in its scripture, exemplified in its traditions and codified in its jurisprudence. When liars such as George Bush and Barack Obama assert that Islam is peaceful, we must be free to present proof that they are misrepresenting reality.

UN resolutions condemning defamation of Islam have another unacceptable effect: they reinforce and give undeserved legitimacy to blasphemy laws which are used to persecute religious minorities in lands where Allah's writ runs such as Pakistan where, if the courts don't execute you for any "blasphemous" word or act, the mob will.

As we wait for revelation of the contents of the '10 version, let us examine the history of their campaign to silence their critics. In 1999, when the original Combating Defamation of Islam resolution was passed, Pakistan made some revealing remarks in the Economic And Social Council.

1. Mr. AKRAM (Pakistan), introducing draft resolution E/CN.4/1999/L.40 on behalf of the States Members of the United Nations that were members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, said that, in the past few years, there had been new manifestations of intolerance and misunderstanding, not to say hatred, of Islam and Muslims in various parts of the world. It was to be feared that those manifestations might become as widespread and endemic as antisemitism had been in the past. There was a tendency in some countries and in the international media to portray Islam as a religion hostile to human rights, threatening to the Western world and associated with terrorism and violence, whereas, with the Quran, Islam had given the world its first human rights charter. No other religion received such constant negative media coverage. That defamation compaign was reflected in growing intolerance towards Muslims. [Emphasis added.]

Examine the emphasized clauses. Reading inter alia, it is obvious that a subliminal link is being drawn between criticism of Islam and Hitler's holocaust. Akram was setting up a false charge of incipient genocide. In the second section of emphasized text, there is mention of a media tendency to portray Islam as hostile to human rights, threatening and associated with terrorism and violence.

The clear implication is that those characterizations of Islam are false. Unfortunately, they are not. Islam is hostile to human rights: its doctrine of perpetual war against everyone who does not submit to its demands is a violation of the right to life. Its declaration that our blood and property only become sacred to Muslims when we become Muslims denies our human dignity and rights. These facts are documented in Islam vs Human Rights.

Islam is threatening to the western world. It has a historical track record of invading Spain, Italy, France , Austria, and other western nations. Islam is associated with violence and terrorism. Two Surahs of the Qur'an are entirely dedicated to warmongering. Four of the six canonical hadith collections have books of Jihad or expedition. Moe preached and practiced terrorism for future generations to emulate.

The Defamation of Islam resolution contained these expressions.

1. Expresses deep concern at negative stereotyping of religions;

2. Also expresses deep concern that Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and with terrorism;

3. Expresses its concern at any role in which the print, audio­visual or electronic media or any other means is used to incite acts of violence, xenophobia or related intolerance and discrimination towards Islam and any other religion;

4. Urges all States, within their national legal framework, in conformity with international human rights instruments to take all appropriate measures to combat hatred, discrimination, intolerance and acts of violence, intimidation and coercion motivated by religious intolerance, including attacks on religious places, and to encourage understanding, tolerance and respect in matters relating to freedom of religion or belief;

The resolution urged states to enact and enforce extremely broad legislation which would violate our First Amendment.

In '05, the resolution complained of involvement of political parties and use of the internet to communicate facts about Islam. In the spring of '09, the resolution included this boilerplate.

14. Reaffirms the obligation of all States to enact the necessary legislation to prohibit the advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, and encourages States, in their follow-up to the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance,7 to include aspects relating to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities in their national plans of action and, in this context, to take forms of multiple discrimination against minorities fully into account;

15. Invites all States to put into practice the provisions of the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief;3

16. Urges all States to provide, within their respective legal and constitutional systems, adequate protection against acts of hatred, discrimination,
intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general, to take all possible measures to promote tolerance and respect for all religions and beliefs and the understanding of their value systems and to complement legal systems with intellectual and moral strategies to combat religious hatred and intolerance;

If we document the fact that Islam inculcates hatred and incites violence, we are accused of "incitement to religious hatred". Turn back to review Ban Ki-moon's incendiary remarks about Fitna. There is no excuse for that sort of bigotry. There is no excuse for demands to enshrine it in national & international law.

The following list is included to assist those who desire to delve deeper into the history and philosophy of the defamation resolutions.

UN documents listed in the footnotes of Defamation of Religions" The End of Pluralism?, published by the Beckett Fund

• Econ. & Soc. Council [ECOSOC], Comm’n on Human Rights, Pakistan, Draft Res., Racism,
  Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and all Forms of Discrimination, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/1999/L.40 (Apr. 20,
  1999). This is a Microsoft Word document. 15kb when saved as html.
• ECOSOC, Comm’n on Human Rights [CHR], Summary Record of the 61st Meeting, ¶¶ 3, 6, U.N.
  Doc. E/CN.4/1999/SR.61 (Apr. 29, 1999) (German and Japanese representatives expressing concern about the
  draft resolution’s narrow focus on Islam).
• CHR Res. 1999/82, at 280, U.N. ESCOR, 55th Sess., Supp. No. 3, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/1999/167 (Apr.
  30, 1999). {As adopted by acclamation, pg 281}
• CHR Res. 2005/3, at 21, U.N. ESCOR, 61st Sess., Supp. No. 3, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/2005/135 (Apr. 12,
  2005)
• CHR Res. 2004/6, at 28, U.N. ESCOR, 60th Sess., Supp. No. 3, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/2004/127 (Apr. 13,
  2004);
• CHR Res. 2002/9, at 56, U.N. ESCOR, 58th Sess., Supp. No. 3, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/2002/200 (Apr. 15,
  2002);
• CHR Res. 2001/4, at 47, U.N. ESCOR, 57th Sess., Supp. No. 3, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/2001/167 (Apr. 18,
  2001);
• CHR Res. 2000/84, at 336, U.N. ESCOR, 56th Sess., Supp. No. 3, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/2000/167 (Apr.
  26, 2000);
• Human Rights Council [HRC] Res. 4/9, at 19, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/4/123 (Mar. 30 2007); Ali S.
  Asani, “So That You May Know One Another”: A Muslim American Reflects on Pluralism and Islam, ANNALS
  AM. ACAD. POL. & SOC. SCI., July 2003, at 40, 40, 49–51.
• G.A., 60th Sess., 3d Comm., Yemen: Draft Resolution: Combating Defamation of Religions, U.N. Doc.
  A/C.3/60/L.29 (Oct. 31, 2005).
• G.A. Res. 60/150, U.N. Doc. A/RES/60/150 (Dec. 16, 2005). Resolution 60/150 was adopted by 101
  to 53 votes with 20 abstentions. U.N. GAOR, 60th Sess., 64th plen. mtg. at 11, U.N. Doc. A/60/PV.64 (Dec.
  16, 2005).
• G.A. Res. 61/164, U.N. Doc. A/RES/61/164 (Dec. 19, 2006); G.A. Res. 62/154, U.N. Doc.
  A/RES/62/154 (Dec. 18, 2007); G.A. Res. 63/171, U.N. Doc. A/RES/63/171 (Dec. 18, 2008).
• U.N. GAOR, 60th Sess., 3d Comm., 45th mtg., ¶ 39, U.N. Doc. A/C.3/60/SR.45 (Nov. 21,
  2005)
• HRC Res. 7/19, at 54, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/4/123 (Mar. 27, 2008); HRC Res. 4/9, supra note 7; G.A.
  Res. 63/171, supra note 18; G.A. Res. 62/154, supra note 18; G.A. Res. 61/164, supra note 18.
• The 2008 General Assembly resolution passed with 86 in
  favor, 53 against, and 42 abstentions. U.N. GAOR, 63rd Sess., 70th plen. mtg. at 17–18, U.N. Doc.
  A/63/PV.70 (Dec. 18, 2008).
• In 2007, the OIC hardly held any informal discussions on the defamation of religions resolution in the
  General Assembly. In 2008, the OIC, led by Uganda, held a number of informal discussions in an effort to
  address concerns from many of the Western delegations. New York Update, General Assembly, 63rd Session,
  Oct. 21–Dec. 18, 2008, N.Y. MONITOR (Int’l Serv. for Human Rights, New York, N.Y.), 2008, at 16, available
  at http://www.ishr.ch/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&Itemid=&gid=252.
• HRC Res. 10/22, at 78, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/10/L.11 (Mar. 26, 2009).
• U.N. Durban Review Conference, Outcome Document of the Durban Review Conference, available at
  http://www.un.org/durbanreview2009/pdf/Durban_Review_outcome_document_En.pdf (last visited July 10,
  2009).
• Githu Muigai, Asma Jahangir & Frank La Rue, Freedom of Expression and Incitement to Racial or
  Religious Hatred, Statement at OHCHR Side Event During the Durban Review Conference (Apr. 22, 2009),
  available at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/opinion/docs/SRJointstatement22April09New.pdf.
• Beckett Fund Submission to OSCE '08
• Racism and Religious Discrimination: Is the concept of “Defamation of Religions” productive?
  Intervention at the tenth regular session of the Human Rights Council
  (2 March 2009 – 27 March 2009)
• See the revised version of A/CONF.211/PC/WG.2/CRP.2 at page 7 for draft outcome document as of 23 January 2009. Available at http://www.un.org/durbanreview2009/pdf/intersession_open_ended19109.pdf
• See also Durban Review Conference Outcome Document [hereafter DRC Outcome Document] (24 April 2009). Available at http://www.un.org/durbanreview2009/pdf/Durban_Review_outcome_document_En.pdf
• A/HRC/12/L.l4/Rev. “Freedom of Opinion and Expression
• PROPHETS, CARTOONS, AND LEGAL NORMS: RETHINKING THE UNITED NATIONS DEFAMATION OF RELIGION
  PROVISIONS JOSHUA FOSTER [Discovered in the process of searching for links to the documents listed above.]

Other relevant documents of interest:

• General Comment to guide States Parties in the implementation of the right to freedom of expression;
• Chairman Leo Testimony - Implications of the Promotion of “Defamation of Religions”
• Becket Fund Resources and Documents:
• What is “Defamation of Religions?”
• Legal Brief
• United Nations Human Rights Council testimony (2006)
• United Nations Human Rights Council testimony (2009)
• Emory Law Review article
• Related blog posts by this author. These tend to be flamers with great detail and much redundancy.
• Ad Hoc Committee Leaves Work Unfinished Our freedom of expression is almost safe until their next session. 10/30/09
• Religious Freedom Report: Suicidal Orwellianism Pay close attention to Hillary's remarks; compare them with the text of the Freedom of Opinion and Expression resolution. 10/27/09
• Urge Your Rep. to Support H.Res.763! The sense of the House resolution against the OIC's censorship campaign languishes in cmte., urge your Rep to get it to the floor for an immediate vote before the General Assembly approves the Defamation of Religions resolution! 10/23/09
• Censorship of Islamophobia: Ignite the Backfire Sign and promote the International Qur'an Petition!!! 10/19/09
• Combating Defamation of Religions: Anticipation The annual resolution is expected to be tabled 11/3 and voted on 11/12. See Reject the Defamation of Religions Resolution! for links to petitions against the resolution, please sign and promote them! 10/19/09
• UNHRC US Delegation Reveals Treachery The U.S. Delegation to the UNHRC uttered and published a statement on a human rights report. That statement exposes the Obama administration’s treason to scrutiny; I can not resist.10/13/09
• Reject the Defamation of Religions Resolution! Open Doors USA, an Evangelical Christian organization, has posted a petition urging United Nations member states to reject the annual Defamation of Islam resolution. I have endorsed their petition, whose text is reproduced below, and urge you to endorse, support and publicize it. For more information about previous Defamation Resolutions, see: UN Bans Criticism of Islam.10/08/09
• Unfairness Doctrine Goes Global Bringing a critical detail right up front: President Obama extended his Unfairness Doctrine to a global scope. 10/05/09
• Ad Hoc Cmte: Non-Paper 08/04/09 The cmte. President's outline of the program of censorship. This document is crucial to comprehending the related posts which follow in this list.
• AdHoc Committee: African Submission 08/03/09 Detailed analysis of the Africa group's proposal to censor critics of Islam.
• AdHoc Cmte USA Submission 08/03/09 This nation is governed by irrational idiots & traitors. Read it and weep.
• AdHoc Cmte: Pakistani Submission 08/03/09 Detailed analysis of the OIC's proposal to censor critics of Islam.
• Ad Hoc Committee: Iranian Submission 08/03/09 Detailed analysis of Iran's proposal to censor critics of Islam.
• Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards 08/01/09 They aim to add a protocol to ICERD to criminalize these blog posts.
• Durban II Draft 4/15/09 04/17/09 The draft went through multiple edits. It contains information vital to comprehending what OIC and theheir UN dhimmis are up to.
• How Censorship Could Become Binding 03/14/09 Plans to amend ICERD to criminalize these blog posts and more.
• Combating Defamation of Religion 03/13/09 See exactly what the UN is up to, in detail.
• Moral Standing: the Complaint 03/12/09 Delving deeper into the issue raised in the post below. Extremely important information & links.
• Hints of Compulsory U.N. Censorship 03/12/09 First hints of the proposed protocol to ICERD. Arcane, but important.
• Defamation of Religions Resolution Revised 12/03/08 Plenty of detail & documentation plus a list of related posts.
• UN: Eliminating Intolerance or Protecting it? 12/04/08 Exposing more UN hypocrisy.
• UN Renews Censorship Demand 11/24/08 A final blast at the annual defamation of Islam resolution.
• Durban II: Execrable Hypocrisy 11/10/08 The Durban II Draft document is divided into five sections . This article examines the hypocrisy involved in demands for censorship. Quotes are taken from sections one and five, with the headings linked to source documents. Emphasis has been added for clarity. Includes links to the articles in the Egregious Arrogance series.
• Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Part 7 11/10/08 Seventh in a series.
• Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Part 6 11/09/08 Sixth in a series.
• Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Part 5 11/08/08
• Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Part 4 11/08/08 Fourth in a series.
• Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Part 3 11/07/08 Third in a series.
• Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Part 2 11/06/08 Second in a series.
• Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Part 1 11/06/08 First in a series on the evolving resolution . This series exposes extreeme hypocrisy & arrogance.
• U.N. Resolving to Silence Islamophobes 10/12/08 Deliaring another treacherous UN resolution.
• U.N. Bans Criticism of Islam: Pretext & Context 09/08/08 This post contains vital information about the documents which serve as a basis for the treacherous resolutions passed by the General Assembly & Human Rights Council. It also has a link to the prime source of UN resolutions.
• UN Resolutions Revisited: Defamation of Religion 08/7/11 Edited 03/19/09 Detailed analysis & deliaring of UN Defamation of Islam Resolutions.
• UNHRC Hyprocisy! 06/04/08 Deliaring a Human Rights Council Resolution.
• More UNHRC AssWholliness 04-04-08 Flamer inspired by UNHRC Defamation of Islam Resolution.
• Islamophobia: Exposing Malicious Malarkey New blog to exploit two speeches referenced in the post above. Masood Khan & Hemayet Uddin are deliared as examplars of al-taqeyya. Their lies were influential in writing the resolutions cited above. 9/08

Sphere: Related Content