Defamation of Religions vs Negative Stereotyping: SCIRF Gets It Wrong

 Leonard Leo, chairman of the board of SCIRF, testified before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, and Human Rights  on the International Religious Freedom Report. There is a move underway to defund SCIRF, presumably because its mission conflicts with Obamination's Islamophilia.

    While I sympathize with the SCIRF and believe that it should be preserved, I take issue with Leo's position on the resolution passed by the HRC last March and currently before the 3^rd Committee prior to a General Assembly vote in December.

    I do not contest the fact that SCIRF was instrumental in steering the resolutions in a new direction, I take issue with the assertion that the  resolution has been substantially improved and its negative impact on freedom of belief & expression substantially reduced.  Only the rhetoric has improved, the meaning, intent and effect are not improved.

Defamation of Religion in the United Nations -- Intolerance Resolution Takes the Place of Defamation Resolution: Over the past decade, resolutions in the UN General Assembly and UN Human Rights Council on the so-called defamation of religions sought to establish a global blasphemy law.  USCIRF’s engagement with the State Department, the U.S. Congress and specific UN member states helped bring about a notable decrease in support for these resolutions over the past three years.  It is an example of the catalytic and coordinating role that the Commission has played.

  Since 2008, the resolutions were supported by only a plurality of member states.  Due to this loss of support, the UN Human Rights Council in March 2011 adopted, in place of the divisive “combating defamation of religions” resolution, a consensus resolution on “combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization of, and discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence against persons based on religion or belief.”  The resolution properly focuses on protecting individuals from discrimination or violence, instead of protecting religions from criticism.  The new resolution protects the adherents of all religions or beliefs, instead of focusing on one religion.  Unlike the defamation of religions resolution, the new consensus resolution does not call for legal restrictions on peaceful expression, but rather, for positive measures, such as education and awareness-building, to address intolerance, discrimination, and violence based on religion or belief.

intolerance

    I can not and will never tolerate the practice & propagation of a doctrine which mandates that we be killed or subjugated, our property seized and our widows raped and our orphans sold into slavery.  By God, I stand on the rights seized by the founders, which they enshrined in the Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights.  I will not accept demands that I tolerate the intolerable.  I will not abide by laws, national or international, demanding silence in the face of approaching evil.

stereotyping

    Allah commands Muslims to wage war against us in 8:39 & 9:29. Those imperatives are confirmed by Moe's Sunnah in Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387 and other hadith. They are codified in Shari'ah: Reliance of the Traveller O9.8-9.9. Allah promises Muslims admission to his celestial bordello if they wage war and threatens them with eternal damnation if they shirk.  Allah gives extra credit for a better seat in his bordello if they take any step to injure or enrage us.

    So most Muslims "don't do that / don't believe that". Oh, don't they? Islam is not cafeteria Catholicism, as made clear by 2:85: "Then do you believe in a part of the Scripture and reject the rest? Then what is the recompense of those who do so among you, except disgrace in the life of this world, and on the Day of Resurrection they shall be consigned to the most grievous torment. ".

    If Muslims "don't do that", then how did the Hindu, Assyrian & Armenian genocides happen?  How do you explain shouts of Takbir in the school at Beslan and the aircraft over New York City? 

    Which Muslim is a believer who fights in Allah's cause, killing and being killed [9:111] and which is a hypocrite whose Islam "will not exceed their throats." [Sahih Bukhari 5.59.638]?

protects individuals

    Who is going to go to Egypt and protect the Copts and their homes, businesses & churches?  Will you send the Marines to Kenya & Nigeria to protect Christians there?  Who will protect Christians in Pakistan?  You and whose army, 24/7/365? 

    You do not protect individuals by passing resolutions, you protect them with "boots on the ground".  You can only protect indigenous Christian minorities by eliminating the Muslims who murder them with impunity. 

    The cartoonists did not assault or kill any Muslims; they did not destroy any property. Muslims, stirred up by rabble rousing Imams at Jumah Salat did that. Exactly how do those resolutions protect Muslims? 

    Islam is not defamed by revelation of the fatal facts linked in previous paragraphs. Muslims are not threatened or stereotyped by revealing those facts. Silencing criticism of Islam would not protect Islam from defamation, neither would it protect Muslims; it would only remove our ability to warn our fellow citizens of approaching danger. 

education

    The malignant & malicious practice of al-Taqiyya & kitman is not education, it is indoctrination.  Islam is not a religion, neither is it peaceful nor is it great. Islam is intra-species predation.  Education will happen if intelligent and rational people read the Qur'an, hadith & Shari'ah.  What currently happens in our educational & religious institutions is indoctrination.

concrete details

    I have prepared two tables comparing the defamation & stereotyping memes. The tables are complemented by relevant quotes from the Secretaries General of the OIC and UN, followed by evidence to further clarify the issue. Bold, blue, underlined text is hyperlinked to source documents.

defamation	stereotyping
Muhammad had coitus with a nine year old girl.	Muhammad had coitus with a nine year old girl.
God would never select an unrepentant sinner as his final prophet.	Muslims tend toward pedophilia because Muhammad is their role model.

Regardless of which standard of conduct is adopted, stating the fact revealed by Aisha, that she was nine years old when Moe consummated their marriage, will be criminalized and condemned. 

defamation	stereotyping	no religion should be equated with terrorism
I will cast terror to strike terror Allah cast terror You are more awful as a fear victorious with terror	I will cast terror to strike terror Allah cast terror You are more awful as a fear victorious with terro	I will cast terror to strike terror Allah cast terror You are more awful as a fear victorious with terro
Islamic doctrines incite terrorism.	Muslims are terrorists because they emulate Moe.	Islam = terrorism.

    No  matter how you slice it; whichever protocol  they follow, truthful statements about Islam must be outlawed and condemned.  Defamation || negative stereotyping is a distinction without a difference.

concrete examples

    In this quote from a speech to the OIC, Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu implies that  Geert Wilders' Fitna and the Danish Cartoons incite religious hatred & violence.

It is clearly established that international law and in particular the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) of 1966 forbids any incitement to religious hatred. Article 20 of this Covenant stipulates that “Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.” Despite this clear stipulation, the Attorney General of Denmark failed to see in the infamous Danish Cartoons issues on Prophet Mohamed, any incitement to hatred on bases of religion or belief. The same authority in the Netherlands did the same thing in the case of the film Fitna, produced by a Member of Dutch Parliament. Such negative or indifferent attitudes adopted by officials in certain Western countries which seem to condone acts of an Islamophobic nature, can only lead to legitimizing Islamophobia and enhancing discrimination against Muslims and exposing their well-being and safety to danger. [Speech 0f His Excellency Prof. Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, Secretary General 0f the Organisation 0f the Islamic conference, at Columbia University 21/09/2008]

    Ban Ki-moon also condemned Fitna.

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

incitement ? 

Fitna

 Fitna juxtaposes violent Qur'an verses and hadith with the rabid hate speech & incitement of several Imams and the resulting terrorism & riots. Fitna does not incite, it exposes incitement.

Motoons

    The Motoons depict Moe as a terrorist.  They are humorous; they do not exhort or incite Kuffar to assault Muslims. Moe died before the invention of gun powder, but he was a terrorist by his own admission, having declared that he was "made victorious with terror". He deliberately built a reputation for egregious barbarian rapine so as to terrify his intended victims, rendering them disorganized and effectively defenseless.

Quran burning

    Pastor Terry Jones planned to hold a Qur'an burning 09/11/10. He chickened out, but in March of '11, he held a four hour mock trial of the Qur'an with Arabic speaking experts on both sides of the debate and, having found the Qur'an guilty of inciting violence, burned it. 

    Muslims in Pakistan, on exiting from Jumah Salat, rioted, resulting in several deaths and considerable property damage. Pastor Jones did not incite violence, the Pakistani Imams incited violence in their rabid rants at Friday prayer services.

Ihsanoglu's jaundiced view

The publication of offensive cartoons of the Prophet six years ago that sparked outrage across the Muslim world, the publicity around the film Fitna and the more recent Qur’an burnings represent incidents of incitement to hatred that fuel an atmosphere of dangerous mutual suspicion. Freedom of expression has to be exercised with responsibility. At the same time, violent reactions to provocations are also irresponsible and uncivilised and we condemn them unequivocally.[http://71.18.253.18/en/topic_details.asp?tID=239]

We have to be sure about what constitutes criticism but not incitement to hatred. For example, when somebody calls for burning of our holy book Qur`an, can it be considered as mere criticism? [http://71.18.253.18/en/topic_details.asp?tID=39]

The most recent and unfortunate in the series of such events was the announcement
pertaining to Bum a Koran Day. It was highly provocative towards the religious sentiments
of Muslims everywhere in the world and must be condemned in the strongest possible terms.
[Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu's speech to the HRC Session 15.]

legal foundation

    Moe ordered the murder of his critics; an example to be emulated.

Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4436:

It has been narrated on the authority of Jabir that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Who will kill Ka'b b. Ashraf? He has maligned Allah, the Exalted, and His Messenger. Muhammad b. Maslama said: Messenger of Allah, do you wish that I should kill him? He said: Yes. He said: Permit me to talk (to him in the way I deem fit). He said: Talk (as you like). So, Muhammad b. Maslama came to Ka'b and talked to him, referred to the old friendship between them and said: This man (i. e. the Holy Prophet) has made up his mind to collect charity (from us) and this has put us to a great hardship. When be heard this, Ka'b said: By God, you will be put to more trouble by him. Muhammad b. Maslama said: No doubt, now we have become his followers and we do not like to forsake him until we see what turn his affairs will take. I want that you should give me a loan. He said: What will you mortgage? He said: What do you want? He said: Pledge me your women. He said: You are the most handsome of the Arabs; should we pledge our women to you? He said: Pledge me your children. He said: The son of one of us may abuse us saying that he was pledged for two wasqs of dates, but we can pledge you (cur) weapons. He said: All right. Then Muhammad b. Maslama promised that he would come to him with Harith, Abu 'Abs b. Jabr and Abbad b. Bishr. So they came and called upon him at night. He came down to them. Sufyan says that all the narrators except 'Amr have stated that his wife said: I hear a voice which sounds like the voice of murder. He said: It is only Muhammad b. Maslama and his foster-brother, Abu Na'ila. When a gentleman is called at night even it to be pierced with a spear, he should respond to the call. Muhammad said to his companions: As he comes down, I will extend my hands towards his head and when I hold him fast, you should do your job. So when he came down and he was holding his cloak under his arm, they said to him: We sense from you a very fine smell. He said: Yes, I have with me a mistress who is the most scented of the women of Arabia. He said: Allow me to smell (the scent on your head). He said: Yes, you may smell. So he caught it and smelt. Then he said: Allow me to do so (once again). He then held his head fast and said to his companions: Do your job. And they killed him.

Shari'ah

    Reliance of the Traveller, O11.10  lists five acts which break the treaty of protection exposing a Dhimmi to execution. This is the fifth item in that list: "or mentions something impermissible about Allah, the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), or Islam."  What is impermissible to mention? O8.7 contains a list of 20 items including: "to revile Allah or His messenger ", "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 ", "to be sarcastic about Allah's name, His command, His interdiction, His promise, or His threat",  "to deny any verse of the Koran ", and "to revile the religion of Islam".

    In reality, the OIC seeks, through the UN, to impose Islamic blasphemy law on us, denying our right to warn our fellow citizens of the existential threat Islam poses to our lives, liberties & prosperity.   We were not stupid enough to outlaw criticism of Communism during the cold war, why should we outlaw criticism of Islam?

Sphere: Related Content

You've Been Mooned: Combating Defamation of Religions

The Secretary General of the United Nations issued his annual report on combating defamation of religions [Islam] September 23.  I present a link to the report below, along with several important excerpts. I have also included a list of links to various documents referenced in the report. 

A/66/372
Combating defamation of religions
Report of the Secretary-General

This issue came to the front burner in 1999 when the HRC passed the original resolution combating defamation of Islam.  Because of the ensuing  controversy, subsequent resolutions substituted religions for Islam in their titles but their contents belie the distinction without a difference.  My sources confirm the original title, but the document linked above lacks it; I presume it has been bowdlerized.

    It is difficult to find the resolution; in my search for it, I found an important quote attributed to Masood Khan, representing Pakistan at the UN.

"Stereotyping of any religion as propagating violence or its association with terrorism constitutes defamation of religion. It unfortunately breeds a culture of hatred, disharmony and discrimination,"

There is one little problem: the element of falsity.

def·a·ma·tion

    [def-uh-mey-shuhn] 

noun

the act of defaming; false or unjustified injury of the goodreputation of another, as by slander or libel;
calumny: She suedthe magazine for defamation of character. [Emphasis added]

"Islam promotes violence"

"Islam promotes violence" is not defamatory if it is true.  "Terrorism is an Islamic tactic" is not defamatory if it is true.  Those statements do not defame Islam or stereotype Muslims unless they are false. 

    "Islam promotes violence" is either true or false. The veracity of the statement can be verified by reference to Islam's canon of scripture, tradition, exegesis & jurisprudence.  Allah said that he ordained jihad for Muslims.

2:216. Jihâd (holy fighting in Allâh's Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allâh knows but you do not know.

Hilali & Khan included a definition of jihad in a parenthetical expression. They give a fuller definition in their footnote to 2:190.  Islamic law defines jihad as "to war against non-Muslims".  Islamic law declares annual military expeditions against disbelievers to be a "communal obligation".  Al-Shafi'i put it this way:

"The least that the imam must do is that he allow no year to pass without having organised a military expedition by himself, or by his raiding parties, according to the Muslims' interest, so that the jihad will only be stopped in a year for a (reasonable) excuse."

Al-Ghazali said something similar:

…one must go on jihad (i.e., warlike razzias or raids) at least once a year...

Islamic law says that the caliph "The caliph (o25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians... " In the next section (O9.9) it says that the caliph "fights all other peoples until they become Muslim".   Why would Islamic law  make such statements?   Only because of what Allah & Moe said and did.   "Ordained" was not Allah's last word on the subject.   "Fight them", "fight those who",  "Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you" . Moe said that he was "ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah."

What did Moe do to implement those jihad imperatives?  He dictated and dispatched extortion letters, and followed up with his army.  See. for example, the letter to the Jews at Khaibar, and the oral tradition about his raid on them.

    Examine the critical quote again, because I have a prime example for you: "Islam promotes violence".  This is the heading from Book 21 of Malik's Muwatta:  "Section: Stimulation of Desire for Jihad"  The title of Riyad us-Saliheen, Book 11, Chapter 234 is "Obligation of Jihad".  It quotes the relevant ayat & ahadith with commentary. 

    Islam is intrinsically violent, by design. It has not been perverted, distorted nor hijacked; it promotes violence because violence was Moe's source of income.  Doubt this?  How did Allah make Moe wealthy?

    This is not defamation of Islam because it is truthful, proven so by Islam's own canon.  This is not stereotyping of Muslims because Allah stated their obligations, defined believers as those who "fight in" his cause, promised them Paradise if they do and Hell if they don't.  Islam is all or nothing, Muslims are not allowed to select the verses they like.

"Terrorism is an Islamic tactic."

    Most of the Qur'anic references to terror are concerned with what Allah will do to when the world ends. Those are not important to this discussion; the others are. Allah said that he would cast terror.  He said that he cast terror. He said that the Jews were more afraid of Moe and his army than of him.

    Islam Awakened presents a table of 37 parallel translations. Here are some interesting samples from 8:57.

• to strike fear
• then scatter by (making an example of) them those who are in their rear
• deal with them in such a manner that those that follow them should abandon their designs and may take warning
• use them to frighten off anyone who comes in their rear
• set an example of their humiliation serving as a deterrent
  
• make a fearsome example of them
• disperse thou through them those behind them,
  
• make a harsh example of them
• deal with them in such a manner as to deter those behind them
• (by inflicting an exemplary punishment upon them) disperse those behind them
• make them a fearsome example
• so as to strike terror among them
• then thereby strike fear in those that are behind them
•  strike terror in those that are behind them
• make of them a fearsome example

8:60 is another prime source of terror references.

• to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies
• to strike terror into the hearts and minds of Allah's enemy
• you terrorize/terrify with it God's enemy
•  to strike terror thereby
•  so that you may strike terror into the hearts of your enemy
• Cause terror with this (war readiness) amongst the enemy of Allah
•  so that you strike terror into the enemies of Allah
• to frighten thereby the enemy of Allah
  
•  that you may strike terror in (the hearts of) the enemies of God
  
• whereby you may frighten the enemy of ALLAH
• to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of God
• you shall strike terror through it
• to threaten the enemy of Allah
•  that you may overawe the enemies of Allah
• whereby ye may strike a terror into the enemy of God,
• whereby ye may strike terror into the enemy of God

    Moe also had something to say about how he was made victorious:  " Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month's journey. "; "I have been made victorious with terror ". Who associated Islam with terrorism? 
            

    Back to the report, this paragraph quotes from another big title officer. [Emphasis added.]

79. In March 2011, the Office was informed that church members of the Dove
World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida, burned a copy of the Koran. The
incident elicited strong condemnation on the part of the United States Government
and religious leaders from different faiths across the world. It also resulted in
violent reactions, including the killing of United Nations staff and others in
Afghanistan. Both the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Secretary-
General replied to letters from the Organization of the Islamic Conference
condemning those acts, which divided peoples and societies, and reaffirming the
collective interest of the international community in countering acts of intolerance.
The Secretary-General also condemned the incident and said that such actions
cannot be condoned by any religion. He also condemned the killing of the United
Nations staff in response. In addition, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on
freedom of religion or belief and the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of
racism sent joint communications about those incidents.

Qur'an burning

    Pastors Terry & Sapp hosted a moot trial of the Qur'an, conducted in Arabic and spanning four hours prior to the burning.  The trial included a qualified Imam and several expert witnesses, at least two of whom are converts from Islam to Christianity.  Why would they find the Qur'an "guilty" of inciting violence?

    The violent reactions did not result from the trial & burning of the Qur'an, they resulted from rabble rousing Imams spewing hatred at Jumah Salat.  Check out the day and time of those riots. They occurred after Friday prayers. 

    UN staff had nothing to do; no connection to the trial & burning of the Qur'an in Florida.  There is no logical relationship between the two acts.   Peoples and societies are divided by the belief of some that they have a divine obligation to conquer the rest.  What did Allah & Moe say that might give them that conceited idea?

    Qur'an burning is an act of outrage, not intolerance.  The Qur'an does not tolerate the existence of disbelievers. Our right to live and worship as we choose or not is the primary issue at stake.  Islam's canon denies those rights, inciting outrage which is expressed by incinerating Qur'ans. 

    The trial & burning of the Qur'an was not condoned by Christianity, it was performed by two pastors and their congregation.  They burned the book which curses them, condemns them to Hell and commands Muslims to wage war upon them. 

    ¶79 is an obvious demand for legislation to prohibit criticizing Islam & burning Qur'ans.  It blames the innocent for the independent criminal actions of the guilty.

81. General Comment No. 34 recognizes that “freedom of opinion and freedom of
expression are indispensable conditions for the full development of the person ...
they constitute the foundation stone for every free and democratic society”. It
further recognizes that “freedoms of opinion and expression form a basis for the full
enjoyment of a wide range of other human rights”.
82. The General Comment also expounded the extent of lawful restrictions that
can be imposed on the right to freedom of expression, prescribing that any
restrictions to freedom of expression must be compatible with the strict
requirements of article 19, paragraph 3, of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights. The General Comment also deals with the relationship between
articles 19 and 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
prescribing that “a limitation that is justified on the basis of article 20 must also
comply with article 19, paragraph 3”. On this point, it underscores that “it is only
with regard to the specific forms of expression indicated in article 20 that States
parties are obliged to have legal prohibitions”. In every other case — while the State
is not precluded in general terms from having such prohibitions — in which the
“State restricts freedom of expression, it is necessary to justify the prohibitions and
their provisions in strict conformity with article 19”.

    I do not see any sign that Ban Ki-moon shares the opinion of the committee of experts who composed Comment 34. 

88. The Special Rapporteurs emphasized the principle that individuals rather than
religions per se are rights-holders. Whereas the debate concerning the dissemination
of expression which may offend the adherents of religions or faiths has throughout
the past 12 years evolved around the notion of “defamation of religions”, they
welcomed the fact that the debate appeared to be shifting to the concept of
“incitement to national, racial or religious hatred”. In his thematic report at the
sixteenth session of the Human Rights Council,3 the Special Rapporteur on freedom
of religion or belief noted that school education could and should contribute to the
elimination of negative stereotypes, which often poison the relationship between
different communities. He stressed that such negative stereotypes had particularly
detrimental effects on minorities and with regard to religious or belief communities.
The Special Rapporteur highlighted the importance of eradicating stereotypes and
prejudices that constitute the root causes of fear, resentment and hatred in order to
prevent violence and human rights abuses.

    I presented sufficient evidence to establish the fact that Islam is not defamed by describing its jihad imperatives & promotion of war through carrot and stick doctrines.  If a Muslim goes to war, he goes to Paradise; if not, he goes to Hell.  Stating this fatal fact is not defamatory because it is truthful, based on Surah At-Taubah 38-39 & Surah As-Saff  10-13.

    At the time of its publication, Ban Ki-moon described Fitna,  Geert Wilders' short documentary exposing the nexus between the Qur'an & terrorism as "hate speech" & "incitement".  It is the Qur'an, not Fitna which constitutes "hate speech" & "incitement" to hatred and violence. 

Negative stereotypes

    If a Muslim is a believer, he "fights in Allah's cause", "killing others and being killed".  That definition of believer is contained in Surah At-Taubah 111.  Muslims are commanded to "Obey Allah and the Messenger". Allah commanded them to fight us until only Allah is worshiped; until we are subjugated and submit to extortion.  Are they then Muslims who sit at home?  Surely they are hypocrites, not believers who are only those who join the jihad.

    Allah said "Indeed in the Messenger of Allâh (Muhammad ) you have a good example to follow for him who hopes in (the Meeting with) Allâh and the Last Day and remembers Allâh much. " How is a Muslim to obey Moe without emulating his exemplary conduct?  What did he say about how he was made victorious?  How did Allah make him wealthy??

    You can not be Muslim without being evil. That is a fatal fact, not a negative stereotype. Allah commands obedience, which he rewrds with gardens flowing with rivers of wine and punishes with the fire.  What did he command Muslims to do?  Was there something about cutting off our heads, fingers and toes?  8:12

    What did Moe do to the men and adolescent boys of the Banu Qurayzah?  He besieged them for two weeks, when they surrendered he slaughtered them in beautiful downtown Medina.  How in Hell does a Muslim obey Allah and his Messenger without engaging in terrorism & genocide??  This is a fact, not a negative stereotype.  "It is not for a Prophet" that he should hold prisoners for ransom until he has made great slaughter.  This is not negative stereotyping, it is stating the fatal facts as contained in Islam's canon.   If Allah's slaves are offended by revelation of these fatal facts, they should break his yoke of slavery and rejoin the human race. 

89. The contributions received indicate that States are addressing the upsurge
in incitement, intolerance and hatred in many parts of the world in various
ways. States and national actors are taking measures to combat these
phenomena and the majority of these actions are in the constitutional and
legislative domain. The principles of equality and non-discrimination as well as
freedom of religion and freedom of expression and opinion are provided for at
the highest level through constitutional enshrinement. Most States have such
provisions on freedom of expression and opinion and freedom of religion and
belief, to varying extents. Some States have prohibitions, inter alia, on the
vilification and desecration of religious symbols, sites, places of worship, and
sacred grounds. In the submissions received, there is often a concurrent
criminal regime for the prohibition of actions infringing the freedom of religion
and belief at the national level. Where advocacy and incitement to hatred is
criminalized, it is often prohibited on several grounds, including racial,
national and ethnic or religious.

incitement, intolerance and hatred

    On what day of the week and at what time of day do riots, bombing & burning of churches and the homes & business of Christians occur in Africa, Arabia & Asia?  Why on friday?  Why after Jumah Salat?  There is no innocent explanation.  What does Allah tell Muslims to do?  What did Moe do that they must emulate?  Do expressions such as "fight them until" and "be harsh against them" have any meaning for you?  Do you have a brain?  Can you obtain a clue??

freedom of religion

    Where in domestic or international law is the right to conquer enshrined?  Muslims are commanded to fight pagans until only Allah is worshiped on a global scale.  Muslims are commanded to fight Jews & Christians until we are subjugated and submit to perpetual extortion.  We must not build or repair churches, display crosses, ring church bells, hold public processions or funerals. 

    If there is no right to conquer, then there is no right to practice Islam.  Show me, by God, exactly where the right to invade & conquer is enshrined in law other than in Reliance of the Traveller, Hedaya & Risala. 

    Where in domestic or international law is the right to rape enshrined?  Show me, by God, exactly where it is written that Muslims have a right to sexually exploit capive women except in the Qur'an, hadith, and Shari'ah compiled there from!  God bless you, can you read and comprehend?  What is the meaning of this:

4:24. Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those (captives and slaves) whom your right hands possess. ...

I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e. coitus interruptus). Abu Said said, "We went out with Allah's Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interrupt us, we said, 'How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah's Apostle who is present among us?" We asked (him) about it and he said, 'It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist." [Bukhari 5.59.459]

    Moe did not just say he was ordered to fight us, he said that until we become Muslims our blood and property are not sacred to Muslims and we have no rights.  Exactly how in Hell can there be a right to believe that, propagate it and act upon it?  If there is any such right, then all our rights are null and void.  It is therefore impossible that there can be any right to propagate and practice Islam. 

freedom of expression

    The first amendment to the US Constitution prohibits Congress from making any law abridging the freedom of speech.  It therefore remains legal for me to reveal the fatal facts of Islam as documented by its canon of scripture, tradition, exegesis & jurisprudence.  This is exactly what Ban Ki-moon & co. seek to outlaw.

    If we can not accurately name and describe the enemy and his doctrines & practices, then we will be rendered defenseless.  That is their objective.  If you harbor any doubts about this, crack open the Risala & Reliance of the Traveller and start reading.  If the expression "anything impermissible" is too vague for you, turn to O8.7 to see the detailed list of prohibited speech.

91. A number of other actions and measures have been highlighted in the
contributions. The importance of public education in promoting tolerance and
understanding in the public education system was noted. The value of ongoing
public awareness-raising by the State, national human rights institutions,
non-governmental organizations, faith groups and religious organizations, the
media and other partners at the national level especially was underlined. The
media has a significant role, and some contributions highlighted its use in
educating the public about different cultures and religions, in counteracting
contentious political discourse and divisive speech, and as a means for
disseminating balanced information and portrayals, as well as bringing
together groups and adherents of different religions and faiths.

    ¶91 promotes indoctrination, not education.

promoting tolerance

    What could be more  obnoxious?  How can any sentient & self-respecting lover of life & liberty tolerate the arrogant assumption of supremacism which assumes global conquest to be a divine right & mandate?  I can not tolerate that which seeks to disposses & kill me, enslaving my widow and orphans.  I can not accept any suggestion or demand that I should tolerate it. 

awareness raising

    Ban seeks to criminalize raising awareness of the existential threat of Islam.  He wants the organs of the state to spew propaganda and paint a false image of benign & anodyne religion; the polar opposite of the objective factual reality of Islam. 

balanced information

    I prefer truthful information that can be objectively evaluated and verified.  That is why I provide links to my sources so that readers can explore the context and verify the quotes.  Allah said "fight them"; Moe said "I am commanded to fight".  Moe fought in 17 battles and ordered about 60 more in which he did not directly participate.  Sahih Bukhari's books of Jihad & Expedition describe the circumstances of some of those battles.  The book of Khumus describes how Moe divided the loot.  Tafsirs confirm the obvious meaning of Allah's jihad imperatives. Shari'ah codifies what Allah said and Moe did.  Africa, Arabia, half of Asia and South East Europe were not conquered by a "religion of peace"  Peace has no part in barbarian conquest.  This subject matter requires truth,  not not malignant malarkey. 

External references cited in the report:

• A/66/251
• 65/224
• ICCPR Art. 27
• HRC resolution 16/18
• 65/138
• ICCPR  Art. 19 & 20
• Draft Document Durban Review Conference
• Human Rights Committee  General Comment No. 34
• OHCHR expert workshops on the prohibition of incitement to national, racial or religious hatred
• A/HRC/16/53

Sphere: Related Content

Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization

Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization This three page draft resolution is dated 03/21/11, considerably post deadline. The database shows it as being submitted on the 18th, one day late.
Despite its length and due to the target rich environment it presents, I reproduce the entire draft resolution, with superscripts linked to my commentary which follows the text of the draft.    To read my comments in coordination with the text, click the superscript and use your back button to return to the text.

    Article 19 & CHRS have published a call for member states to vote for this resolution.  The resolution represents a change of tactics, not strategic objectives. It is designed to deceive human rights activists, and it appears to be a success.

    It is probable that the resolution will be debated and adopted Thursday or Friday of this week, too soon to mount an effective opposition. This blog post will stand as a model for rebuttal when the resolution is repeated next year.  Please follow the links and take maximum advantage of the information provided.

A/HRC/16/L.38

Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization
of, and discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence
against persons based on religion or belief

Human Rights Council
Sixteenth session
Agenda item 9
Racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related
form of intolerance, follow-up and implementation
of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action
Pakistan (on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference): draft resolution 16/…

Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization
of, and discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence
against persons based on religion or belief¹

The Human Rights Council,
Reaffirming the commitment made by all States under the Charter of the United
Nations to promote and encourage universal respect for and observance of all human rights
and fundamental freedoms without distinction as to, inter alia, religion or belief,

Reaffirming also the obligation of States to prohibit discrimination on the basis of
religion or belief and to implement measures to guarantee the equal and effective protection
of the law,

Reaffirming further that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
provides, inter alia, that everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and
religion or belief, which shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his
choice², and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or
private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice³ and teaching,

Reaffirming the positive role that the exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and
expression and the full respect for the freedom to seek, receive and impart information can
play in strengthening democracy and combating religious intolerance,⁴

Deeply concerned about incidents of intolerance⁵, discrimination⁶ and violence
against persons based on their religion⁷ or belief in all regions of the world,

Deploring any advocacy of discrimination or violence on the basis of religion or
belief,⁸

Strongly deploring all acts of violence against persons on the basis of their religion
or belief, as well as any such acts directed against their homes, businesses, properties,
schools, cultural centres or places of worship,⁹

Concerned about actions that willfully exploit tensions or target individuals on the
basis of their religion or belief,

Noting with deep concern the instances of intolerance, discrimination and acts of
violence in many parts of the world, including cases motivated by discrimination against
persons belonging to religious minorities, in addition to the negative projection of the
followers of religions and the enforcement of measures that specifically discriminate
against persons on the basis of religion or belief,

Recognizing the valuable contribution of people of all religions or beliefs to
humanity and the contribution that dialogue among religious groups can make towards
improved awareness and understanding of the common values shared by all humankind,
Recognizing also that working together to enhance implementation of existing legal
regimes that protect individuals against discrimination and hate crimes, increase interfaith
and intercultural efforts, and to expand human rights education are important first steps in
combating incidents of intolerance, discrimination and violence against individuals on the
basis of religion or belief,

1. Expresses deep concern at the continued serious instances of derogatory
stereotyping, negative profiling and stigmatization¹⁰ of persons based on their religion or
beliefs, as well as programmes and agendas pursued by extremist organizations and groups¹¹
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 violence¹², 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;¹³

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;¹²

4. Recognizes that the open public debate of ideas, as well as interfaith and
intercultural dialogue at the local, national and international levels can be among the best
protections against religious intolerance, and can play a positive role in strengthening
democracy and combating religious hatred, and convinced that a continuing dialogue on
these issues can help overcome existing misperceptions;¹⁴

5. Notes the speech given by Secretary-General of the Organization of the
Islamic Conference, Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, at the fifteenth session of the Human Rights
Council, and draws on his call on States to take the following actions to foster a domestic
environment of religious tolerance, peace and respect, by:

(a) Encouraging the creation of collaborative networks to build mutual
understanding, promoting dialogue and inspiring constructive action towards shared policy
goals and the pursuit of tangible outcomes, such as servicing projects in the fields of
education, health, conflict prevention, employment, integration and media education;

(b) Creating an appropriate mechanism within the government to, inter alia,
identify and address potential areas of tension between members of different religious
communities, and assisting with conflict prevention and mediation;
(c) Encouraging training of government officials in effective outreach strategies;

(d) Encouraging efforts of leaders to discuss within their communities causes of
discrimination and evolving strategies to counter these causes;

(e) Speaking out against intolerance, including advocacy of religious hatred that
constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence;

(f) Adopting measures to criminalize incitement to imminent violence based on
religion or belief;¹⁵

(g) Understanding the need to combat denigration and negative religious
stereotyping of persons, as well as incitement to religious hatred, by strategizing and
harmonizing actions at the local, national, regional and international levels through, inter
alia, education¹⁶ and awareness-building;

(h) Recognizing that the open, constructive and respectful debate of ideas, as
well as interfaith and intercultural dialogue at the local, national and international levels,
can play a positive role in combating religious hatred, incitement and violence;

6. Calls upon all States:

(a) To take effective measures to ensure that public functionaries in the conduct
of their public duties do not discriminate against an individual on the basis of religion or
belief;

(b) To foster religious freedom and pluralism by promoting the ability of
members of all religious communities to manifest their religion, and to contribute openly
and on an equal footing to the society;

(c) To encourage representation and meaningful participation of individuals,
irrespective of their religion, in all sectors of society;

(d) To undertake a strong effort to counter religious profiling, which is
understood to be the invidious use of religion as a criterion in conducting questionings,
searches and other law enforcement investigative procedures;¹⁷

7. Encourages States to consider providing updates on efforts made in this
regard as part of ongoing reporting to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner
for Human Rights;

8. Calls upon States to adopt measures and policies to promote the full respect
and protection for places of worship and religious sites, cemeteries and shrines, and to take
measures in cases where they are vulnerable to vandalism or destruction;

9. Calls for strengthened international efforts to foster a global dialogue for the
promotion of a culture of tolerance and peace at all levels, based on respect for human
rights and diversity of religions and beliefs, and decides to convene a panel discussion on
this issue at its seventeenth session within existing resources

---

1. This sentence contains the main change: from combating defamation of Islam to Muslims; from the institution to its members. That is a change in tactics, not strategic objective.  The goal remains unchanged: to erect a legislative shield to protect Islam from all questioning and criticism, consistent with Shari'ah, which prescribes the death penalty^A for 'reviling' Allah, Moe & their war cult. ^B   Muslims are supposed to be stigmatized individually by accurately describing the accursed doctrines of the war cult which enslaves them to Satan.  Thus, every exposure,questioning & criticism of Islamic doctrines will be held to 'stigmatize' Muslims, an act to be prohibited by law.

        'Incitement' will be defined broadly, as in Ban Ki-moon's condemnation^C of Geert Wilders' short documentary, Fitna, which exposes, but does not constitute incitement to violence. The Motoons^D a graphic depiction of Islamic jihad-terrorism also exposed incitemenht, but are themselves, not an example of incitement.

2. ICCPR, Article 18, ¶2 implies, but does not clearly state, the right to disaffiliate from one religion and adopt another. International consensus on that right is impossible because Islam prescribes the death penalty for apostasy. Refer to the relevant Islamic law.^A
3. Manifestation & practice of Islam is problematic because participation in offensive wars of conquest^E is ordained for Muslims^F and is their essential life mission^G.  Islam is inseverable, Muslims are not empowered to select what they like and reject the violent parts.^H  It is not possible to practice Islam peacefully in the long run.
4. "Combating religious intolerance" is assumed to be a good thing. Why should anyone tolerate a 'religion' that asserts a demonic mandate--right & duty to conquer him and enslave his widow & orphans^I?  Why should anyone tolerate a 'religion' that imputes any step taken to "injure" or "raise the anger of" a disbeliever to the believer's credit as a "deed of righteousness"^J? 

        The citation of the right to freedom of expression is deliberately deceptive because the intent of this resolution is to criminalize any and every expression that questions or criticizes the doctrines & practices of Islam.  How, exactly, will freedom of expression combat intolerance?  The unstated premise of this and all similar resolutions, including the preceding resolutions "combating defamation of religions" is that all questioning & criticism of Islam constitutes incitement, intolerance & hate speech. 

5. Muslims are so "deeply concerned" about 'intolerance" that its holy scripture declares it intensely intolerant of all rival religions so that if anyone chooses another religion, "it will never be accepted of him"^K. 
6. Muslims are so "deeply concerned" about 'discrimination' that their Shari'ah dictates that conquered Christians living under Islamic domination are prohibited from making public processions, prayers or funerals, ringing bells, displaying crosses and building churches.^L
7. Muslims are so "deeply concerned" about violence based on the victim's religion that their holy scripture , oral tradition & Shari'ah mandate & exemplify offensive wars of conquest against pagans, Jews, Christians & Zoroastrians.^M
8. How can you be a Muslim while deploring Islam? This is the Acme of hypocrisy or cognitive dissonance! ^M
   
9. If you deplore the burning of homes & churches and the killing of Christians & other minorities in Nigeria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Indonesia & Egypt, why do you remain affiliated with the war cult that inculcates hatred and incites those acts? 
10. Deep concern about "derogatory stereotyping, negative profiling and stigmatization"? Are you concerned about your own scripture and Shari'ah? ^N 
11. They are complaining about the Dutch PVV and similar political parties in Austria, Germany Switzerland and elsewhere. They want such parties outlawed.
12. They just condemned Islam's own canon of scripture, tradition, biography & jurisprudence!
13. That is a demand for legislation outlawing "negative stereotyping', which translates to all questioning and criticism of Islamic doctrines and practices, including this blog post informing you about their outrageous arrogant demands.
14. If the interlocutors had sufficient knowledge of Islamic doctrine and courage to expose it, such dialogue might disabuse a few people of the mis-perception that Islam is the "religion of peace".
15. This is derived from the boilerplate demands for criminalization of 'defamation of Islam'. It encompasses all negative expression about Islam. Review the exemplary statement by Ban Ki-moon quoted below.^C
16. They demand that we convert our schools into Islamic indoctrination centers, a process that is already  underway. 
17. Consider the most recent mass casualty attacks, both successful and interdicted. What was the affiliation of the perpetrators? How many of them were not Muslims?  Islam inculcates hatred and incites violence. It promises participants admission to a celestial bordello^O and threatens shirkers with eternity in Hell^P.  Muslims are commanded to wage war against us and rewarded for any injury they inflict.  Of course it is unreasonable to be suspicious of them. Yeah, right.

---

1. Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 8, ¶1.
2. ibid, Book O, Chapter 8, ¶7.
3. 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.”

4. View the Motoons
5. Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 9, ¶0 pg. 617
   ibid, ¶1, pg. 618
   ivid, ¶8, pg. 620
   Al-Hedaya, Volume II, Book IX, Chapter 1, pg. 141
6. Noble Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqarah, Ayah 216.
7. ibid, Surah At-Taubah, ayah 111
8. ibid,Surah Al-Baqarah, Ayah 85
9. ibid, Surah Surah Al-Ahzab, Ayah 26
   Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 9, ¶13
10. Noble Qur'an, Surah At-Taubah, Ayah 120
11. ibid, Surah Al-Imran , Aya 85
12. Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 11 , ¶5
13. Noble Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal, Ayah 39
    ibid, Surah At-Taubah, Ayah 29
    Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387
    Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 9, ¶8
14. Noble Qur'an, Surah Al-Baiyyinah, Ayah 6
    Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 11, ¶5, items 2-7
15. Noble Qur'an, Surah As-Saff, Ayat 10-12
    ibid, Surah Surah An-Naba' , Ayah 31
    
16. Ibid, Surah At-Taubah, Ayat 38-39
    ibid, Surah an-Naba', Ayah 21

Sphere: Related Content