Elimination of Racism and 'Related Intolerance'

 While fools and liars continue singing the praises of the Human Rights Council & OIC for abandoning the 'Defamation of Religions [Islam]' meme, the UN published one of the resolutions that went through the General Assembly like grease through a goose December 19  '12: A/RES/66/144

    Take note of the innocuous title; who can oppose the worthy cause of eliminating racism?

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

    The devil is in the details.  I highlighted a key phrase and clauses in the title; the evils they conceal while including by reference  make the resolution unacceptable.   The bureaucrats redefined racism: it no longer simply denotes irrational and invidious hatred of dark shinned people; it now connotes rational and well founded opposition to Islam. 

    Racism is explicitly redefined to include 'Islamophobia' in a preliminary report created in the preparatory stages of the second Durban Conference. 

4.  Emphasizes the urgent need to address the scourges of anti-Semitism, Christianophobia, and Islamophobia as contemporaryforms 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;[Preliminary document of the African Regional Conference Preparatory to the Durban Review Conference]

    Re-read that quotation with special attention to the highlighted words and phrases.  There is nothing racial about opposition to Islam. There are Black, White and Asian Muslims; Islam is not a race.  Islam is an ideology, system of laws  and military force to spread and establish it. 

    'Related intolerance', included in the boiler plate of numerous resolutions, translates to 'Islamophobia'. The global effort is to eliminate 'Islamophobia'. Its intent is to criminalize and punish rejection of and opposition to Islam. 

    The phrase "comprehensive implementation of" in the third line of the title applies to the Durban Declaration. Who is familiar with its contents?  Here  is a clear demand for the enactment & enforcement of legislation to criminalize  the formation of anti-Islamic political parties.

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;

    The Durban Declaration also demands that we not scrutinize those most likely to engage in terrorism. The perpetrators of the Accursed Abomination were young Muslim males, not little old ladies. 

72. Urges States to design, implement and enforce effective measures to eliminate the
phenomenon popularly known as “racial profiling” and comprising the practice of police and
other law enforcement officers relying, to any degree, on race, colour, descent or national or
ethnic origin as the basis for subjecting persons to investigatory activities or for determining
whether an individual is engaged in criminal activity;

   
    The Durban Declaration also demands censorship, including of the internet. 

89. We note with regret that certain media, by promoting false images and negative
stereotypes of vulnerable individuals or groups of individuals, particularly of migrants and
refugees, have contributed to the spread of xenophobic and racist sentiments among the public
and in some cases have encouraged violence by racist individuals and groups;
90. We recognize the positive contribution that the exercise of the right to freedom of
expression, particularly by the media and new technologies, including the Internet, and full
respect for the freedom to seek, receive and impart information can make to the fight against
racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance; we reiterate the need to respect
the editorial independence and autonomy of the media in this regard;
91. We express deep concern about the use of new information technologies, such as
the Internet, for purposes contrary to respect for human values, equality, non-discrimination,
respect for others and tolerance, including to propagate racism, racial hatred, xenophobia, racial
discrimination and related intolerance, and that, in particular, children and youth having access
to this material could be negatively influenced by it;

145. Urges States to implement legal sanctions, in accordance with relevant
international human rights law, in respect of incitement to racial hatred through new information
and communications technologies, including the Internet, and further urges them to apply all
relevant human rights instruments to which they are parties, in particular the International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, to racism on the Internet;
146. Urges States to encourage the media to avoid stereotyping based on racism, racial
discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance;
147. Calls upon States to consider the following, taking fully into account existing
international and regional standards on freedom of expression, while taking all necessary
measures to guarantee the right to freedom of opinion and expression:
(a) Encouraging Internet service providers to establish and disseminate specific
voluntary codes of conduct and self-regulatory measures against the dissemination of racist
messages and those that result in racial discrimination, xenophobia or any form of intolerance
and discrimination; to that end, Internet providers are encouraged to set up mediating bodies at
national and international levels, involving relevant civil society institutions;
(b) Adopting and applying, to the extent possible, appropriate legislation for
prosecuting those responsible for incitement to racial hatred or violence through the new
information and communications technologies, including the Internet;

    What is the meaning of incitement to racial hatred or violence?  How are those terms evaluated in the real world?  According to Ban Ki-moon, they include exposing the nexus between Islamic doctrines expressed in Islamic scripture & tradition and Islamic violence in terrorism & rioting. 

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."

The Secretary General explicitly said that Geert Wilders had no right to utter & publish Fitna, which displayed Islamic doctrines of jihad beside video of rabble rousing sermons and pictures of the resulting havoc.  The texts cited by Wilders are documented in this blog post: http://snooper.wordpress.com/2008/03/27/fitna-supporting-documentation/ 

    A/RES/66/144 's threat to free expression is not limited to its inclusion by reference of the Durban Declaration. 

6. Expresses deep concern at inadequate responses to emerging and
resurgent forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance,
and urges States to adopt measures to address those scourges vigorously with a view
to preventing their practice and protecting victims;
7. Underlines the imperative need to address all the contemporary forms
and manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related
intolerance, which include, inter alia, incitement to such hatred, racial profiling and
the propagation of racist and xenophobic acts through cyberspace, with a view to
maximizing protection for victims, providing legal remedies and combating
impunity;
8. Stresses that States and international organizations have a responsibility
to ensure that measures taken in the struggle against terrorism do not discriminate in
purpose or effect on grounds of race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin,
and urges all States to rescind or refrain from all forms of racial profiling;
9. Recognizes that States should implement and enforce appropriate and
effective legislative, judicial, regulatory and administrative measures to prevent and
protect against acts of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related
intolerance, thereby contributing to the prevention of human rights violations;

    ¶ 11 on page 4 is very clear.

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

    The Secy'. Gen'l. labeled Fitna hate speech & incitement not protected by the right of freedom of expression.  Take a clear eyed look at the last sentence in ¶ 11 above.  It says that prohibitions on advocacy of religious hatred are consistent with freedom of expression.  Fitna is an exposure of religious hatred, it is not advocacy of hatred!  The enemies of liberty invert facts, law and morality. There is no truth or virtue in them. 

14. Calls upon all States, in accordance with the commitments undertaken in
paragraph 147 of the Durban Programme of Action, to take all measures necessary
to combat incitement to violence motivated by racial hatred, including through the
misuse of print, audiovisual and electronic media and new communications
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
measures necessary to guarantee that right;

   
  
   ¶ 15 demands that we convert our schools into Islamic indoctrination centers; inculcating tolerance of intolerable evil. . 

15. 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;

    The resolution also alludes to an ad hoc committee of the HRC, without revealing its mandate. 

Taking note of Human Rights Council decision 3/103 of 8 December 2006,2 by
which, heeding the decision and instruction of the World Conference, the Council
established the Ad Hoc Committee of the Human Rights Council on the Elaboration
of Complementary Standards,

Noting also the progress made during the third session of the Ad Hoc
Committee on the Elaboration of Complementary Standards, held in Geneva on 22
and 23 November 2010 and from 11 to 21 April 2011, and noting further the
convening of the fourth session, to be held in Geneva during 2012,

64. Requests the Secretary-General to provide the resources necessary for the
effective fulfilment of the mandates of [...] the Ad Hoc Committee on the Elaboration of Complementary Standards

The committee's mandate is to code a binding protocol to ICERD which will incorporate therein criminalization of everything the OIC is kvetching about: Fitna, the Motoons, International Burn the Koran Day, International Judge the Koran Day and every negative statement about Allah, Moe and their damnable war cult.   Their next meeting begins April 10.  Unlike these resolutions, the protocol will be binding and enforcible.  If you would like to know more about it, make good use of these resources:

• Ad Hoc Committee On Compelmentary standards (126.1K pdf) Compiled from a series of blog posts about a proposed protocol to ICERD which will criminalize all criticism of Islam. The cmte meets from Oct. 19-30 '09 to write the protocol.
• Ad Hoc Cmte On Complementary Stds 125KB pdf compiled from several blog posts.
• Ad Hoc Cmte Draft Document 120KB pdf  containing Google's Translation of the French language draft plus links to references and blog posts.

Sphere: Related Content

Elimination of Racism and Related Intolerance

The sixty-fourth session Third Committee Agenda item 67 (a) Elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance A/C.3/64/L.53. echoes certain of its predecessors. After the customary bs boilerplate& arcane references to external documents, they get down to brass tacks.[Emphasis added, spelling original.]

15. Reaffirms also that, as underlined in paragraph 13 of the outcome document of the Durban Review Conference, any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law, that the dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority, hatred, acts of violence or incitement to such acts shall be declared offences punishable by law, and that these prohibitions are consistent with freedom of opinion and expression;

13. Reaffirms that any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law; reaffirms further that all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination as well as all acts of violence or incitement to such acts shall be declared offence punishable by law, in accordance with the international obligations of States and that these prohibitions are consistent with freedom of opinion and expression; [http://www.un.org/durbanreview2009/pdf/Durban_Review_outcome_document_En.pdf]

16. Underlines at the same time the positive role that the exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, as well as the full respect for the freedom to seek, receive and impart information, can play in combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance;

17. Encourages those States that have made reservations to article 4 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination to give serious consideration to withdrawing such reservations as a matter of priority;

Article 4

States Parties condemn all propaganda and all organizations which are 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 racial hatred and discrimination in any form, and undertake to adopt immediate and positive measures designed to eradicate all incitement to, or acts of, such discrimination and, to this end, with due regard to the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in article 5 of this Convention, inter alia:

(a) Shall declare an offence punishable by law 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 against any race or group of persons of another colour or ethnic origin, and also the provision of any assistance to racist activities, including the financing thereof;

(b) Shall declare illegal and prohibit organizations, and also organized and all other propaganda activities, which promote and incite racial discrimination, and shall recognize participation in such organizations or activities as an offence punishable by law;

(c) Shall not permit public authorities or public institutions, national or local, to promote or incite racial discrimination.

The United States of America does not regard the Convention as creating any obligation incompatible with the United States Constitution. It does not accept any obligation to enact measures under Article 4, which it views these as incompatible with freedom of expression, or under Articles 2, 3, and 5 with respect to private conduct. The Convention is not self-executing in US law.^[4] [Wikipedia] [Emphasis added.]

¶15 quotes and cites ¶13 of the outcome document of the Durban Review Conference. In reading that text, recall the report of the preliminary meeting, which equates criticism of Islam with racism: "anti-Semitism, Christianophobia, and Islamophobia as contemporary forms of racism".

The terms therein referenced require clear definition.

• advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred
• constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence
• ideas based on racial superiority,
• hatred,
• acts of violence or incitement to such acts

Those terms are broadly defined by the OIC and its factotum. Examine the Secretary General's condemnation of 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.]

A 17 minute documentary video which displays verses from the Qur'an, rabble rousing sermons by Muslim clerics and the results thereof is:

• hate speech
• incitement to violence.

By that standard, all negative exposure of Islamic doctrines & practices must be outlawed. We must not state the fact that Islamic scripture declared war on us, Islamic tradition makes it perpetual, and the outcome, as it relates to Jews is genocidal. How can we defend ourselves if we are prohibited by law from revealing the identity, intentions, motivation & actions of the enemy which assails us?

¶16 is an Orwellian way of telling us that only expression that praises Islam and conceal its intentions and effects can be permitted. ¶17 is a demand that we yield our First Amendment right to free speech to Islam's blasphemy law.

I invite all parties to carefully consider ICERD's fourth article, which is reproduced above. The signatories condemn all propaganda and organizations based on ideas of racial superiority. But racial no longer applies only to skin color, it applies to religion since Durban II conflated them. Those nations which signed ICERD must condemn all propaganda and organizations based on ideas of religious superiority. Of course, you don't have a clue. I will give you one.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 80:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Verse:--"You (true Muslims) are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind." means, the best of peoples for the people, as you bring them with chains on their necks till they embrace Islam.

3:110 declares Muslims to be the best of peoples, clearly an expression of religious superiority. As Muslims and their factotums define the term, that is racial superiority, which must be condemned.

Sub paragraph a compels signatories to proscribe by law:

• all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred
• incitement to racial discrimination
• all acts of violence or incitement to such acts

Recalling the conflation of race with religion, (a) requires the outlawing of the Qur'an because it is based on religious (racial) superiority and incites violence against people of other religions (races).

• 8:39
• 9:29
• 9:123

Sub paragraph b requires signatories to proscribe by law:

• organizations which promote racial discrimination
• all acts of violence or incitement to such acts against any race or group of persons of another colour or ethnic origin

Bearing in mind the conflation of race with religion, Islam must be proscribed by law because it declares war on pagans, Jews & Christians and discriminates against conquered Jews & Christians by imposing a special tax on them and placing them under extraordinary legal & social limitations which are specified in Islamic law. Doubters & dissenters should turn to Reliance of the Traveller O9.8, O9.9 & O11.5.

Of course, ICERD specifies race, it does not specify religion. But ICERD is not the only applicable international human rights covenant.

ICCPR

Article 20

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

Who can deny the fact that Surah At-Taubah is propaganda for and advocacy of religious hatred and war? It must be prohibited by law! Unfortunately, it is Allah's perfected, immutable word, incapable of reformation. Proscribing the practice & propagation of Islam is the only alternative.

CPPCG

Article 1

The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.

Article 2

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

• (a) Killing members of the group;
• (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
• (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

Article 3

The following acts shall be punishable:

• (a) Genocide;
• (b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;
• (c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
• (d) Attempt to commit genocide;
• (e) Complicity in genocide.

8:37. In order that Allâh may distinguish the wicked (disbelievers, polytheists and doers of evil deeds) from the good (believers of Islâmic Monotheism and doers of righteous deeds), and put the wicked (disbelievers, polytheists and doers of evil deeds) one on another, heap them together and cast them into Hell. Those! it is they who are the losers.

17:16. And when We decide to destroy a town (population), We (first) send a definite order (to obey Allâh and be righteous) to those among them [or We (first) increase in number those of its population] who are given the good things of this life. Then, they transgress therein, and thus the word (of torment) is justified against it (them). Then We destroy it with complete destruction.

17:17. And how many generations have We destroyed after Nûh (Noah)! And Sufficient is your Lord as an All-Knower and All-Beholder of the sins of His slaves.

Allah speaks of heaping disbelievers together and casting them into Hell in 8:37. In 17:16, he brags about making complete destruction. In 17:17 he brags about destroying multiple generations. He is setting a pattern and precedent. Observe how he fleshes it out.

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.

In 8:67, Allah sets great slaughter as the prerequisite for releasing captives for ransom, telling Moe that he must put slaughter ahead of profit. That tells us that Allah favors genocide. This is confirmed in Surah Muhammad.

47:4. So, when you meet (in fight Jihâd in Allâh's Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives). Thereafter (is the time) either for generosity (i.e. free them without ransom), or ransom (according to what benefits Islâm), until the war lays down its burden. Thus [you are ordered by Allâh to continue in carrying out Jihâd against the disbelievers till they embrace Islâm (i.e. are saved from the punishment in the Hell-fire) or at least come under your protection], but if it had been Allâh's Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allâh, He will never let their deeds be lost,

"Till when you have killed and wounded many of them" confirms Allah's quest for genocide. Moe besieged the Banu Qurayzah until they surrendered. What he did after they surrendered serves to confirm the message of 8:67 & 47:4.

Sahih Volume 4, Book 52, Number 280:

Narrated Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri:

When the tribe of Bani Quraiza was ready to accept Sad's judgment, Allah's Apostle sent for Sad who was near to him. Sad came, riding a donkey and when he came near, Allah's Apostle said (to the Ansar), "Stand up for your leader." Then Sad came and sat beside Allah's Apostle who said to him. "These people are ready to accept your judgment." Sad said, "I give the judgment that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as prisoners." The Prophet then remarked, "O Sad! You have judged amongst them with (or similar to) the judgment of the King Allah." [For more complete detail, refer to 5.59.448]

Moe arbitrarily slaughtered about 700 prisoners of war. What he did next should make your blood boil with outrage.

Abu Dawud Book 38, Number 4390:
Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi:
I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.

First he decapitated the men, and cast them into a trench, then he did the same to their adolescent sons. Allah wants genocide and he gets it. Islam's practice of genocide, mandated by Allah, is obviously not in conformity with the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

The Banu Qurayzah, Armenian, Assyrian and Hindu genocides demonstrate a pattern of continuing crime against humanity. Islamic prophecy projects it far into the future: to the end of the world. The following hadith is one of the clearest among several with similar content.

Abu Dawud Book 37, Number 4310:

Narrated Abu Hurayrah:

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

This saying, distilled to its essence, means that Jesus will return to make genocidal war upon the remaining remnant of Jews & Christians, destroying both populations. Besides being blasphemous, it is a token of Islam's genocidal intent.

Confirmation of Islam's intention is found in Ibn Kathir's Tafsir of 7:167.

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

The violation of Article 1, 2.1 and 3.1 is obvious. Likewise, violation of 3.3 is easy to demonstrate by quoting one popular hadith.

Sahih Muslim Book 041, Number 6985:
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.

That hadith tells Muslims that they can not obtain admission to Paradise and enjoy their rivers of wine and 72 houris until they exterminate the Jews.

ICERD, ICCPR & CPPCG condemn Islam and require its proscription by law. Who will enforce those international human rights covenants? Do you have the courage and conviction to demand that the World Court enforce international law against Islam? For the sake of justice, sign the International Qur'an Petition and send it to everyone you can hope to influence with an exhortation to sign and forward it.

Sphere: Related Content

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 5^th 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..

• You’ve Been Mooned!
• U.N. Bans Criticism of Islam: Pretext.
• United Nations Ban Criticism of Islam
• Defamation of Religions Resolution Revised
• UN Renews Censorship Demand
• UN Resolutions Revisited: Defamation of Religions
• Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Part 1
• Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Part 2
• Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Part 3
• Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Part 4
• Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Part 5
• Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Part 6
• Durban II: Egregious Arrogance Part 7

Sphere: Related Content

AdHoc Cmte USA Submissionrelated intolerance,complementary standards, Islamophobiarelated intolerance,complementary standards, Islamophobia

Outline for the Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards Consultations

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

The committee's mission is to write new international legislation to criminalize criticism of Islam. They solicited suggestions from the member nations to get the process started. Islam, because it is false and malicious, can not tolerate criticism. Islamic law prescribes the death penalty for any criticism of Allah, Moe, and their doctrines. Muslims, acting through the OIC and its clique in the United Nations, are demanding the enactment and enforcement of national and international legislation to criminalize criticism of Islam. While specifically complaining of the Danish Cartoons and the short documentary created by Geert Wilders, their demand for censorship is much broader.

Unlike Iran and Pakistan, the United States did not submit demands for criminalizing criticism of Islam. Unfortunately, the two page submission, which begins on page 26, displays an a high level of cognitive dissonance. [ Emphasis added.]

The United States wishes to reiterate its committment to fighting racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and looks forward to working with other States contributing to initiatives that promote tolerance and respect for diversity. The United States is home to individuals from diverse racial, religions and ethnic backgrounds. .We are profoundly aware of the destructive consequences of racism and understand the concerns that have given rise to the work of this Committee.

"Related intolerance" is a code phrase for "Islamophobia", which is equated with racism. There is no rational basis for fighting rational objections to Islamic doctrine and practice!

The United States has learned from the experience in our own country how crucial robust free expression and a thriving marketplace of ideas are to the promotion of tolerance, religious freedom, greater understanding among individuals of different backgrounds, and ultimately to the defeat of racist and discriminatory ideas in societies. Similarly, the United States believes in the importance of engaging in proactive governmental outreach and policies to
assure racial, ethnic, and religious groups are protected and respect for diversity is promoted. Such governmental outreach can take a variety of forms, including the holding of town hall meetings and conferences with affected groups to listen and learn of the challenges they face and develop ways for the government to better address their concerns. These actions, which are based upon a moral and social responsibility to combat advocacy to national, racial or religious
hatred, rather than a legal obligation to punish hateful expression, are essential to simultaneously maintaining robust free expression and allowing the government to take an active role in the promotion of tolerance and respect.

This would appear, at first glance to be a robust defense of our first amendment freedom of expression. But an examination of the first listed objective throws a bucket of cold water on that hope. "promotion of tolerance", in this context, can only mean tolerance of the intolerable: Islam.

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

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

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

The United States does not believe that amendments to the international human rights legal framework - or new interpretations of existing legal obligations - are warranted to fight the scourges cf racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. Rather than seeking additional restrictions to expression, the United States advocates for more robust governmental outreach policies with respect to racial, ethnic and religious groups as well as the institution of appropriate legal regimes that deal with discriminatory acts and hate crimes.

Nothing is warranted to fight "related intolerance", which is a code phrase for opposition to Islam. Ordinarily, I would happily accept the rejection of Islam's contumacious demand for legislation unconstitutionally restricting my right of free expression. But that rejection is coupled with an implicit acceptance of the enemy's false premise, which renders it null and void.

The United States views racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance as serious challenges facing the international community and believes they must be dealt with by the Ad Hoc Committee in a methodical and deliberate manner. The United States submits that this process of self-examination and action by international community begin with greater opporttutities to exchange views and address empirical data and practice on matters related to racial, ethnic, and religious diversity, discrimination, and intolerance so as to broaden our common understanding of these important issues and provide a solid foundation f or a broad-based consensus further actions and initiatives.

Inclusion of "related intolerance", which refers to objections to Islamic doctrine & practice, implicitly accepts the enemy's false premise and can not be accepted. It makes me ashamed to be an American. How can my government sink so low as to condemn my advocacy of life & liberty and demand that I tolerate the existence of a predatory institution whose mission is mercenary and whose method is to deprive free men of life, liberty and property?


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

Another suggestion constitutes an irrational surrender.

• Evolution of Legal and Policy Frameworks: An assessment of the evolution of domestic legal and policy frameworks dealing with these issues and how effective they have been in dealing with intolerance and discrimination. Such an assessrnent would also review any distinctions made within these frameworks between actions taken based upon a moral and social responsibility to combat advocacy to national, racial or religious hatred on the one hand and those based upon a legal obligation to prohibit such advocacy on the other, and analyze the relative results of each;

To the extent that a person is rational and informed, he will hate Islam, and no attempt should be made to reduce his ardor or extinguish the fire of hatred. Islam is inimical to human life and liberty. Its supremacism, triumphalism and intolerance render it intolerable. The concept of a divine mandate to conquer the world, terrorizing and killing or enslaving everyone who resists is absolutely intolerable. How can there be a legal obligation to prevent rational discussion of the doctrines and practices of a religion of world domination through genocidal warfare?

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

Sphere: Related Content

The High Commissioner's Big Lie Part 2

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

150. Calls upon States, in opposing all forms of racism, to recognize the need to
counter anti-Semitism, anti-Arabism and Islamophobia world-wide, and urges all States to take
effective measures to prevent the emergence of movements based on racism and discriminatory
ideas concerning these communities;

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

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

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

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

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

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

The outcome document contains 79 references to "racism". We must not ignore the implied meaning of that word. The following quote is from the Preliminary document of the African Regional Conference Preparatory to the Durban Review Conference [Emphasis added.]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Wikipedia provides the arcane detail required to comprehend paragraph 39.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

An obvious reference to Fitna and the Danish cartoons.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sphere: Related Content