Islamic Nations Seek Legally Binding Way to Counter Criticism of Islam

Thankfully non-Muslims of the world are slowly waking up to the threat that Islam brings to freedom loving nations. While most of the readers of this site are obviously happy with this, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) is not. They are now pushing forward in attempt to try and make it against international law to criticize Islam. As they know that if we cannot name our enemy, we cannot defeat it. In the past the OIC was able to get the United Nations to ban all criticism of Islam in regards to human rights. Will they be able to pull this off? With the UN involved, this is very possible.

Hat tip to The Religion of Peace.

Islamic Nations Seek Legally Binding Way to Counter Religious ‘Defamation’
Monday, November 16, 2009
By Patrick Goodenough, International Editor

(CNSNews.com) – As support wanes for its campaign to secure controversial but non-binding “defamation of religion” resolutions at the United Nations, the Islamic bloc is pushing ahead with an alternative route – one that would carry the weight of international law.

The OIC is now attempting to have a key U.N. panel amend an existing international treaty to encompass supposedly religiously defamatory speech.

Unlike the resolutions, changing the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) to cover religion would be legally enforceable.

The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) has for the past decade overseen the passage of non-binding resolutions at the U.N. General Assembly and human rights bodies.

Last week, the most recent effort passed in the General Assembly’s Third Committee, which deals with social, cultural, and humanitarian issues. It will go before the full General Assembly for a vote next month, but the committee vote indicates a continuing, measurable decline in support.

Eighty-one countries voted for the resolution, 55 opposed it and 43 abstained. The result showed less support for and more opposition against the resolution than for those introduced by the OIC over the last three years. (see graph)

As in past years, most support came from the 57-member OIC (although two members, Burkina Faso, and Cameroon, abstained) plus non-Muslim allies in the developing world, led by China, Russia, Cuba and Venezuela.

Comparisons of voting records from 2006 to date reveal a continuing erosion of support in Latin America. Chile, Mexico, Panama, Uruguay all voted against the OIC-led resolution this year, having abstained in 2008. Elsewhere, Lesotho and Sri Lanka were among those who moved from supporting the resolution in 2008, to abstaining this year.

The OIC argues that religion needs to be protected from “defamation” – acts such as the publication of newspaper cartoons satirizing Mohammed, or the suggestion that the Koran promotes violence against non-Muslims.

Although its resolutions purport to cover all religions, Islam is the only one cited by name. The text passed by the Third Committee voices concern that “Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism.”

The OIC campaign has been confronted by freedom of expression advocates who say the bloc is trying to shield Islam, its teachings, practices, institutions and leaders, from legitimate criticism or scrutiny.

Critics say defamation prohibitions should cover individuals, not religions. They charge that resolution proponents are trying to introduce in Western societies similar restrictions to those enforced in some Islamic countries, where converts from Islam or those with dissident views risk trial for apostasy or blasphemy.

‘Binding normative standards’

Unlike the nonbinding U.N. resolutions, the OIC’s alternative strategy proposes to develop “new binding normative standards relating to religious ideas, objects and positions,” including “legal prohibition of publication of materials that negatively stereotypes, insults or uses of offensive language on matters regarded by followers of any religion or belief as sacred.”

Link to Article

Clinton Takes a Stand Against Islamic Censorhip

Hillary Clinton has actually done the right thing and is taking a stand against the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC), and the United Nations which in the past had banned any criticism of Islam in regards to human rights. Miracles do happen!

Clinton Denounces Proposed 'Defamation of Religions' Policies
By Michelle A. Vu|Christian Post Reporter

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton voiced strong opposition Monday to proposed U.N. resolutions on “defamation of religions,” saying that such policies would restrict free speech.

“The United States will always seek to counter negative stereotypes of individuals based on their religion and will stand against discrimination and persecution,” Clinton stated. “But an individual’s ability to practice his or her religion has no bearing on others’ freedom of speech.”

The protection of speech about religion and religious discourse is important in a world with many different faith beliefs, asserted the high-ranking U.S. diplomat.

Earlier this year, the U.N. Human Rights Council adopted an anti-defamation draft resolution that human rights groups warn would protect a religion rather than adherents of religions.

Leonard A. Leo, chair of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, last week testified to Members of Congress that the only religion and religious adherents that are specifically mentioned in the “defamation” resolutions – this year’s and past years – are Islam and Muslims.

“Aside from Islam, the resolutions do not specify which religions are deserving of protection, or explain how or by whom this would be determined,” Leo stated.

Several prominent groups working with persecuted Christians have also spoken out against the resolutions, which are sponsored annually by the Organization of the Islamic Conference, because they say the policies would be manipulated to further harass Christians and other religious minorities in Muslim-majority countries.

“Many Christians living in these countries [that make up the Organization of Islamic Conference] are already severely impacted by restrictive laws – especially those living under strict Shariah law,” said Open Doors USA President/CEO Carl Moeller. “From the right to worship freely to the ability to share the Gospel, the Defamation of Religions Resolution threatens to justify local laws that already marginalize Christians."

Since 1999, the Organization of the Islamic Conference has annually sponsored a "defamation of religions" resolution in the U.N. Human Rights Council, and, since 2005, in the General Assembly.

The resolution adopted this past March by the U.N. Human Rights Council is currently non-binding, but OIC has publicly stated that its goal is for the U.N. to adopt a binding international covenant against the “defamation of religions.” Next month, a similar resolution will be considered for adoption by the General Assembly.

Link to Article

Netanyahu: No War Crimes Trials for Israelis

Early last month, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu blatantly defied Obama and OKed the construction of 100's of apartments in the West Bank. Today Bibi has taken a strong stand against the Jew hating UN. I wish that America had a leader as strong as this man!

Netanyahu: No war crimes trials for Israelis
By JOSEF FEDERMAN

JERUSALEM – Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday vowed never to allow Israeli leaders or soldiers to stand trial on war crimes charges over their actions during last winter's military offensive in the Gaza Strip, furiously denouncing a U.N. report in a keynote address to parliament.

Netanyahu's fiery rhetoric — and his decision to open the high-profile speech with remarks on the report — reflected the deep distress felt among Israeli leaders after a U.N. commission accused Israel of intentionally harming civilians when it launched a massive attack in Gaza to stop years of rocket fire.

"This distorted report, written by this distorted committee, undermines Israel's right to defend itself. This report encourages terrorism and threatens peace," Netanyahu said in his address at the opening of parliament's winter session. "Israel will not take risks for peace if it can't defend itself."

The U.N. report, compiled by a team led by former war crimes prosecutor Richard Goldstone, accused both Israel and Hamas of war crimes and possible crimes against humanity. It specifically accused Israel of using disproportionate force, deliberately targeting civilians and destroying civilian infrastructure, and using people as human shields. It accused Hamas of deliberately targeting civilians and trying to spread terror through its rocket attacks.

Israeli officials across the board have condemned the report, saying their country had little choice but to take harsh action against militants who were terrorizing southern Israel. They also blame Hamas for civilian casualties, saying the Islamic militant group took cover in residential areas during the fighting. However, Goldstone's strong credentials as a respected South African jurist, his Jewish faith and past support for Israeli causes have made it hard for Israel to dismiss the claims.

Netanyahu angrily noted the report's portrayal of Israeli leaders as war criminals. "The truth is exactly the opposite. Israel's leaders and its army are those who defended the citizens of Israel from war criminals," he said, before vowing to defend the country's wartime leaders.

"We will not allow Ehud Olmert, Tzipi Livni and Ehud Barak, who sent our sons to war, to arrive at the international court in the Hague," he said.

While Netanyahu has repeatedly lashed out at the U.N. report, Monday's comments appeared to be a direct response to a new Palestinian push for a vote on the report in the U.N.'s Human Rights Council. If the vote takes place, the matter could be referred to higher U.N. bodies that could theoretically push for war-crimes prosecution.

Link to Article

UN Approves Obama-Egypt Don't Criticize Islam Resolution!

Back in June Obama gave a completely one sided pro-Islamic speech in Cairo. Today we learn that he has sponsored a US-Egypt UN resolution which is against the criticism of "religions". We all know what so called religion he is trying to protect and the Egyptian government which persecutes Christians, are the last people who should try and dictate what can be said about religions. This is just another victory for Islam.

UN rights body approves US-Egypt free speech text
By FRANK JORDANS

GENEVA — The U.N. Human Rights Council approved a U.S.-backed resolution Friday deploring attacks on religions while insisting that freedom of expression remains a basic right.

The inaugural resolution sponsored by the U.S. since it joined the council in June broke a long-running deadlock between Western and Islamic countries in the wake of the publication of cartoons depicting the Muslim Prophet Muhammad.

The resolution has no effect in law but provides Muslim countries with moral ammunition the next time they feel central tenets of Islam are being ridiculed by Western politicians or media through "negative racial and religious stereotyping."
American diplomats say the measure — co-sponsored by Egypt — is part of the Obama administration's effort to reach out to Muslim countries.

"The exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression is one of the essential foundations of a democratic society," the resolution states, urging countries to protect free speech by lifting legal restrictions, ensuring the safety of journalists, promoting literacy and preventing media concentration.

Rights groups cautiously welcomed the resolution as an improvement on earlier drafts, but said Egypt was in no position to lecture other countries about free speech as it has a poor record on the matter.

"Egypt's cosponsorship of the resolution on freedom of expression is not the result of a real commitment to upholding freedom of expression," said Jeremie Smith, Geneva director of the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies.

"If this were the case, freedom of expression would not be systematically violated on a daily basis in Egypt," he said.

Others warned that the resolution appears to protect religions rather than believers and encourages journalists to abide by ill-defined codes of conduct.

"Unfortunately, the text talks about negative racial and religious stereotyping, something which most free expression and human rights organizations will oppose," said Agnes Callamard, executive director of London-based group Article 19.

"The equality of all ideas and convictions before the law and the right to debate them freely is the keystone of democracy," she said.

Although the resolution was passed unanimously, European and developing countries made it clear that they remain at odds on the issue of protecting religions from criticism.

Some Asian and African countries had called for stronger condemnation of articles, cartoons and videos they believe defames Islam.

Link to Article

UN Fires US Diplomat for Afghan Poll Criticism

As usual the truth does not matter to the Islamic supporting United Nations. They clearly proved this last year when they banned all criticism of Islam in regards to human rights. All freedom loving nations should of pulled out of this joke of an organization a long time ago.

UN Envoy Fired for Afghan Poll Criticism

UNITED NATIONS – UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Wednesday, September 30, removed Peter Galbraith, a top US diplomat, from his post as deputy head of the UN mission in Afghanistan over criticism of the recent president vote.

"The secretary general has made this decision in the best interest of the mission,” said a statement issued by Ban's office in New York.

“He reaffirms his full support for his special representative, Kai Eide."

Peter Galbraith fell out with top UN envoy Kai Eide after taking a tough line on the August presidential election, which was marred by allegations of widespread fraud.

He had reportedly called for a complete recount of the vote, angering West-backed incumbent President Hamid Karzai, who preliminary results gave a 54.6 percent of the vote.

EU election observers have said that about 1.5 million votes - about a quarter of all ballots - could be fraudulent and that 1.1 million votes cast for Karzai are suspicious.

If enough of Karzai's ballots are nullified because of fraud that he no longer has 50 percent, he would face a run-off against former foreign minister Abdullah Abdullah.

Galbraith, a former ambassador to Croatia and ally of Richard Holbrooke, the US point man for Afghanistan and Pakistan, left Kabul two weeks ago after a quarrel with his Norwegian boss.

The row has exposed divisions among Afghanistan's Western backers over how to deal with the presidential election.

Link to Article

Obama on Nuke Conflict With Iran: ‘I’m Not Interested in Victory’~Video

Even though we have recently learned that Iran was hiding another nuclear plant, and that they are going to ask for nuclear fuel at a UN meeting next week, Obama admits that he does not want victory over the madmen of Iran. What a leader.....

Obama Threatens Iran With Military Action!

Is the new King of the United Nations, actually going to take a stand against Iran and their nuclear ambitions?

Obama warns Iran: `come clean' on nukes
By CHARLES BABINGTON and ROBERT BURNS

PITTSBURGH – Backed by other world powers, President Barack Obama declared Friday that Iran is speeding down a path to confrontation and demanded that Tehran quickly "come clean" on all nuclear efforts and open a newly revealed secret site for close international inspection. He said he would not rule out military action if the Iranians refuse.

Obama joined the leaders of Britain and France in accusing the Islamic republic of clandestinely building an underground plant to make nuclear fuel that could be used to build an atomic bomb. Iranian officials acknowledged the facility but insisted it had been reported to nuclear authorities as required.

"Iran's action raised grave doubts" about its promise to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes only, Obama told a news conference at the conclusion of a G-20 summit whose focus on world economic recovery was overshadowed by disclosure of the Iranian plant.

Obama said a telling moment could come next week when Iran meets with U.S. and other major nations to discuss the nuclear issue.

"Iran is on notice that when we meet with them on Oct. 1 they are going to have to come clean and they are going to have to make a choice" between international isolation and giving up any aspirations to becoming a nuclear power, he said. If they refuse to give ground, they will stay on "a path that is going to lead to confrontation."

In a dramatic, early morning announcement about the secret Iranian facility, Obama said, "Iran is breaking rules that all nations must follow. The size and configuration of this facility is inconsistent with a peaceful program."

Unbowed, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said his country had done nothing wrong and Obama would regret his accusations.

At a news conference in New York, Ahmadinejad said the plant wouldn't be operational for 18 months but sidestepped a question about whether Iran had sufficient enriched uranium to manufacture a nuclear weapon. Still, he said such armaments "are against humanity, they are inhumane," and he said anyone who pursues them "is retarded politically."

Link to Article

New UN Resolution Aims at Nuclear-Free World

Once again we just how upside down the world is today. Just yesterday it was revealed that Iran will ask for nuclear fuel at a UN meeting next week. Today King of the UN Obama, is claiming that all countries will be giving up their nuclear weapons. Has anyone over there been paying attention to the fact that Iran is getting closer to having nuclear weapons, and their threats to Israel? Of course they have, they just do not care.

New UN resolution aims at nuclear-free world
By EDITH M. LEDERER

UNITED NATIONS – With U.S. President Barack Obama presiding over an historic session, the U.N. Security Council unanimously approved a U.S.-drafted resolution Thursday aimed at ridding the world of nuclear weapons.

Russia, China and developing nations supported the U.S.-sponsored measure, giving it global clout and strong political backing.

The resolution calls for stepped up efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, promote disarmament and "reduce the risk of nuclear terrorism."

It was only the fifth time the Security Council met at summit level since the U.N.
was founded in 1945. And Obama was the first American president to preside over a Security Council summit, gaveling the meeting into session and announcing that "the draft resolution has been adopted unanimously."

"The historic resolution we just adopted enshrines our shared commitment to a goal of a world without nuclear weapons," Obama said immediately after the vote. "And it brings Security Council agreement on a broad framework for action to reduce nuclear dangers as we work toward that goal."

Just one nuclear weapon set off in a major city could cause major destruction, Obama said.

He said the global effort would seek to "lock down all vulnerable nuclear materials within four years."

"This is not about singling out an individual nation," he said. "International law is not an empty promise, and treaties must be enforced."

"We will leave this meeting with renewed determination," Obama said.

Link to Article

Iran to ask for Nuclear Fuel at Talks Next Week

While the world sits and watches, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will represent his new hard line cabinet, and thumb his nose at the world by asking for nuclear fuel at a UN meeting next week. Will anyone stop this man? Israel?

Iran to ask for nuclear fuel at talks next week
By GEORGE JAHN

Iran's president says his country will ask the six world powers at nuclear talks next week for imports of highly enriched uranium — material that the U.S. fears Tehran wants to use to arm nuclear warheads.

Iran vehemently denies having nuclear weapons aspirations and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told The Associated Press on Tuesday that his country was seeking to buy uranium that is highly enriched — or near that level — to fuel a small research reactor.

He also made clear that Iran is seeking uranium that is enriched only to 20 percent — the threshold for the high-enrichment level but substantially below then 90 percent- plus grade needed for nuclear warheads.

"We are interested in purchasing it, and we'd like to offer that as an issue to expand discussions on the table for the next meeting," he told the AP on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly.

That request could put the U.S. and its five negotiating partners in a bind at the Oct. 1 talks in Geneva. Until now, Iran has produced only low-enriched uranium, but it could use refusal of its request as a pretext to start producing high-enriched material.

Ahead of the negotiations, the foreign ministers of the six nations — the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany — were meeting Wednesday on the sidelines of the General Assembly to discuss how to get Iran to stop uranium enrichment. Russian news agencies cited an official in the Russian delegation as saying Moscow does not rule out new sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program.

U.N. sanctions on Iran are meant to prohibit exports of sensitive nuclear material and technology. The international community is unlikely to give Iran enriched uranium closer to weapons-grade level at a time when it wants Tehran to stop enrichment.

In the enrichment process, uranium oxide is processed into uranium hexafluoride, which then is spun to varying degrees of enrichment, with low-enriched uranium used for nuclear fuel and upper-end high-enriched uranium used for nuclear weapons.

Security Council refusal to waive the sanctions could give Tehran a plausible reason to turn to its own facilities and produce high-enriched uranium.

Since Iran's program was discovered seven years ago, it has put thousands of centrifuges online to churn out enriched uranium. But the International Atomic Energy Agency says the more than a ton of enriched material it has amassed is all below the 5 percent level and well below the 20 percent highly enriched mark.

Still Iran's accumulation of well over 1,000 kilograms (2,200 pounds) of low-enriched uranium gives it more than enough material to produce enough weapons-grade uranium through further enrichment for one nuclear weapon.

Link to Article

NY Helmsley Hotel Boots Pres. of Iran!

While Obama seems to have no issue with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad being on our turf, the Helmsley Hotel does. With a heads up from the United Against Nuclear Iran, Helmsley has given Mahmoud the NYC welcome he deserves.

Hat tip to Kerry.

A'jad gets heave-ho from Helmsley Hotel
By CARL CAMPANILE

The New York Helmsley Hotel last night abruptly canceled a long-planned banquet for next week after finding out that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was scheduled to attend and speak, The Post has learned.

Helmsley representatives told Ahmadinejad to beat it after being informed by the security group United Against Nuclear Iran that the Israel-hating, Holocaust-denying America basher was going to be in the house next Thursday.

Helmsley execs were unaware that Ahmadinejad -- who will be in town for a meeting of the UN General Assembly next week -- was involved in the event until informed by UANI yesterday.

An Iranian student group had booked the space months ago, said Howard Rubenstein, spokesman for Helmsley Properties.

"As soon as Helmsley corporate management learned of the possibility of either the Iranian Mission or President Ahmadinejad holding a function at the New York Helmsley Hotel, they immediately ordered the cancellation of that function," Rubenstein said.

"Neither the Iranian Mission nor President Ahmadinejad is welcome at any Helmsley facility. The Helmsley organization is grateful to United Against Nuclear Iran for bringing this matter to its attention so that appropriate action could be taken."

UANI applauded the New York Helmsley's move.

"We are pleased with the decision by the Helmsley group. Now more than ever, American corporations must realize that doing business with Iran provides legitimacy to a brutal dictator and indirectly supports the development of an Iranian nuclear bomb," UANI President Mark Wallace said last night.

In a letter to New York Helmsley general manager Mark Briskin, Wallace had warned about Ahmadinejad.

"By doing business with the Iranian government, the Helmsley is accepting blood money from a regime that brutally suppresses its own people and that is a danger to global security," Wallace wrote.

"Moreover, by providing a forum for President Ahmadinejad's speech, the Helmsley is serving as a bullhorn for the propaganda of the illegitimate leader of a brutal, theocratic dictatorship."

UANI also threatened a public boycott of Helmsley properties, if the company went ahead with the Ahmadinejad event.

Link to Article

Hamas Complains, So U.N. School Will Not Teach Gaza Students About Holocaust

Although the UN is supposed to be about truth and freedom, they have no problem in helping advance the Islamic agenda. In the past they have even banned the criticism of Islam at the UN in regards to human rights. This is just another example of our taxpayer dollars funding the enemy.

Hat tip to the Munz @ Munz's Place.

Hamas Complains, So U.N. School Will Not Teach Gaza Students About Holocaust
Thursday, September 03, 2009
By Patrick Goodenough, International Editor


(CNSNews.com) – The United Nations’ refugee agency for Palestinians does not intend to include the Holocaust in the curriculum at schools it runs in the Gaza Strip, a U.N. spokesman said following criticism by Hamas about the purported plan.

While Hamas’ objections to including information on the Holocaust in school lesson plans was not particularly surprising, some Jewish organizations have taken issue with the U.N. for apparently backtracking in the face of the criticism from the terrorist group that rules Gaza.

The U.N. Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), operates more than 600 schools in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon, with around 200,000 children enrolled in Gaza.

Early this week, a Hamas refugee committee wrote to the agency, complaining about what it said were plans to teach children in Gaza about the Holocaust.

“[We] refuse to let our children be taught this lie created by the Jews and intensified by their media,” the letter read, according to the Palestinian news agency, Ma’an.

“First of all, [the Holocaust] is not a fact, and secondly, those who added it to the curriculum intended to mess with our children’s emotions.”

But a spokesman for U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Farhan Haq, told a briefing in New York Tuesday that, according to UNRWA, “the Holocaust is not included in the curriculum in Gaza."

Link to Article

UN Says World Should Honor Sharia in Regards to Refugees

The pro-Islamic United Nations which has already banned any criticism to Islam in regard to human rights has stepped up their support for Islam a notch. They want the world to honor the part of Sharia that says that countries must take in refugees.
(Obviously when an Islamic country does this, a non-Muslim still has to live under their rules.)

The catch is that "Today, the majority of refugees worldwide are Muslims,". Sorry, not interested in using Sharia law, or having more Muslims come into my country. No thanks.

Islam Laid Basis of Refugee Laws: UN

CAIRO — Islam has influenced and enriched modern-day international refugee laws more than any other source, a United Nations study said on Tuesday, June 23, lamenting that Muslims make up a large bulk of the world refugees.

"The international community should value this 14-century-old tradition of generosity and hospitality and recognize its contributions to modern law," UN High Commission for Refugees Chief Antonio Guterres wrote at the forward of the study.

The study, "The Right to Asylum Between Islamic Shari`ah and International Refugee Law", sought to assess the impact of Islamic laws and values on modern-day legal framework upon which UNHCR bases its global activities on behalf of tens of millions of uprooted people.

It concluded that Shari`ah, 14 centuries ago, created the bases for many of the refugee-related international laws.

It noted that under Shari`ah Muslims and non-Muslims alike have the right to seek and enjoy asylum from persecution.

SNIP

"Today, the majority of refugees worldwide are Muslims," notes Guterres.

According to the UNHCR, there are a total of 16 millions refugees and asylum seekers and 26 million internally displaced people in the world today.

Half the world refugees come from two Muslim countries: Iraq and Afghanistan.

SNIP

Guterres regretted that Muslim refugees are deprived from guaranteed rights because of the growing racism and xenophobia in the world.

SNIP

"These attitudes have also contributed to misperceptions about Islam, and Muslim refugees have paid a heavy price," Guterres wrote.

Link to Article

Islamic Bloc to Set Up its Own Human Rights Body

The powerful Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) which in the past had bullied the UN into banning all criticism of Islam in regards to human rights and is also attempting to get a UN resolution to ban the publication of blasphemous caricatures of Mohammad, is now planning to set up their own worldwide Islamic "human rights commission". What is allowed under Sharia law often contradicts Western human rights and make no mistake about it, this is a push to try and slowly implement Sharia law into the West. Please keep in mind that President Obama has invited the chief of the OIC to the White House.

Islamic Bloc Wants to Set Up its Own Human Rights Body
Monday, April 13, 2009
By Patrick Goodenough, International Editor

(CNSNews.com) – A bloc of the world’s Islamic states, which has been accused of undermining human rights at the United Nations, is planning to establish its own “independent human rights commission.”

The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the 57-nation bloc of Muslim nations at the U.N., held a conference Sunday at its headquarters in Saudi Arabia to discuss the plan.

OIC Secretary-General Eklemeddin Ihsanoglu in a speech stressed that “human rights and man’s dignity are an integral part of Islam and core components of Islamic culture and heritage,” according to an OIC statement.

International interest in the issue of human rights had grown exponentially over the past two decades, said Ihsanoglu, a Turkish academic. The complexity of the issue called for the need to refine the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights, he added, “in keeping with the current global human rights discourse.”

The 1990 declaration controversially states that all human rights and freedoms must be subject to Islamic law (shari’a), although senior Islamic leaders have over the years disputed the assertion that the Islamic document contradicts the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The OIC statement did not elaborate on how the bloc envisaged that the Cairo Declaration would be “refined.”

Among the OIC’s more active members are countries where shari’a is imposed to varying degrees. Critics say the tenets of Islamic law often result in discriminatory treatment of women, religious minorities, and converts from Islam to other faiths.

Arguing that Islam and Muslims are increasingly under attack, the OIC has over the past decade sponsored a string of controversial “defamation of religion” resolutions at the U.N. General Assembly and at the world body’s human rights agencies, the Commission on Human Rights and its successor Human Rights Council.

Opponents of the campaign say it amounts to an attempt to place Islam and some of the more controversial practices associated with it above criticism – to protect a religion, rather than its adherents, from “defamation.”

In his speech, Ihsanoglu said establishing an OIC human rights commission would pave the way for intellectual and political reform in OIC member states.

He said it would contribute to promoting “tolerance and fundamental freedoms, good governance, the rule of law, accountability, openness, dialogue with other religions and civilizations, the rejection of extremism and fanaticism, and the strengthening of the sense of pride in the Islamic identity.”

Only 14 of the OIC’s 57 members qualify as “electoral democracies,” according to criteria applied by Freedom House. None are Arab states.

And of the 57, only six – Benin, Guyana, Indonesia, Mali, Senegal and Suriname – are deemed “free” according to Freedom House assessment. The democracy watchdog scores all nations annually for political rights and civil liberties, classifying them as either “free,” “partly free” or “not free.”

Link to Article

UN Body OKs Call to Curb Religious Criticism

Back in August of 2008 the Islamic catering United Nation "human rights" council had banned all criticism of Islam and Sharia law in regards to human rights. Today the UN has approved a resolution urging the free world to do the same. It is nice to see that the UN is OK with stonings and amputations.

UN body OKs call to curb religious criticism
By FRANK JORDANS – 1 hour ago

GENEVA (AP) — The U.N.'s top human-rights body approved a proposal by Muslims nations Thursday urging passage of laws around the world to protect religion from criticism.

The proposal put forward by Pakistan on behalf of Islamic countries — with the backing of Belarus and Venezuela — had drawn strong criticism from free-speech campaigners and liberal democracies.

A simple majority of 23 members of the 47-nation Human Rights Council voted in favor of the resolution. Eleven nations, mostly Western, opposed the resolution, and 13 countries abstained.

The resolution urges states to provide "protection against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions and incitement to religious hatred in general."

"Defamation of religions is the cause that leads to incitement to hatred, discrimination and violence toward their followers," Pakistan's ambassador Zamir Akram said.

"It is important to deal with the cause, rather than with the effects alone," he said.

Muslim nations have argued that religions, in particular Islam, must be shielded from criticism in the media and other areas of public life.They cited cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad as an example of unacceptable free speech.

"Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism," the resolution said.

Opponents of the resolution included Canada, all European Union countries, Switzerland, Ukraine and Chile.

"It is individuals who have rights and not religions," Canadian diplomat Terry Cormier said.

India, which normally votes along with the council's majority of developing nations, abstained in protest at the fact that Islam was the only religion specifically named as deserving protection.

India's Ambassador Gopinathan Achamkulangare said the resolution "inappropriately" linked religious criticism to racism.

The council is dominated by Muslim and African countries. Its resolutions are not binding, but are meant to act as recommendations for U.N. member states on issues of human rights.

Earlier, a coalition of more than 100 secular and faith groups had called on governments to oppose the resolution, warning that it could lead to accusations of defamation among different faiths.

The United States did not vote on the resolution because it is not a member of the council. The Bush administration announced it was virtually giving up on the body and would participate in debates only if absolutely necessary because of the Geneva body's anti-Israel statements and its failure to act on abuses in Sudan and elsewhere.

U.S. diplomats resumed their observer role in the council after President Barack Obama took office, though it is unclear whether Washington will stand for one of the 18 council seats up for election in May.

Esther Brimmer, Obama's nominee for the job of Assistant Secretary of State for International Organizational Affairs, told a Senate hearing Tuesday that the council was a "major disappointment, diverted from its mission by states with some of the worst human rights records."

Link to Article

U.S. Pulling out of ‘Durban II’ Conference

Surprisingly President Obama is doing the right thing and boycotting the Durban II Jewish hate fest. Although this does not make up for him putting money into the hands of our enemies and supporting Sharia law.

U.S. pulling out of ‘Durban II’ conference
By Ron Kampeas · February 27, 2009
WASHINGTON (JTA) -- The Obama administration has decided to boycott the so-called Durban II conference out of concerns for anti-Semitism.

Multiple sources on a conference call with the White House on Friday told JTA that the Obama administration had opted not to attend any further preparatory meetings ahead of the planned U.N. conference against racism in Geneva in April.

The conference reprises the 2001 conference in Durban, South Africa that devolved into an anti-Jewish free-for-all. Canada and Israel have opted not to attend the conference, and some U.S. Jewish groups had been pressing the United States to do the same.

Preparations for a draft document so far have seen Iran leading a coterie of nations blocking inclusion of anything that might guarantee Jewish protections – including mention of the Holocaust – while inserting draconian language guarding Islam against "insult."

The State Department sent a delegation, including a senior staffer from the American Jewish Committee, to this month's preparatory talks. The delegation's conclusions were that the anti-Israel and anti-Western tendencies were too deeply entrenched to excise.

Now that the United States is withdrawing from the conference, European nations are expected to follow.

Speaking for the White House on Friday's call were Samantha Power and James Warlick, who handle international organizations for, respectively, the national security council and the State Department; and Jennifer Simon, an adviser to Susan Rice, the U.S. envoy to the United Nations.

Link to Article

U.N. Bans its own Leader From Criticizing the Islamic World~Video

Back in August when the U.N. Human Rights Council banned the criticism of Islam at the U.N. they were not kidding. The Muslim lead Human Rights Council which clearly is one-sided on the Israel-Palestine issue was questioned by the UN leader Secretary General Ban Ki-moon about their agenda. The Human Rights Council led by Elchin Amirbayov of Azerbaijan has said "that the agenda should not be questioned". It is clear who runs the U.N., and it is not the good guys.

U.N. Bans Criticism of Islam

Piece by piece Muslims are slowly chipping away at our freedoms, instead of assimilating they want to bring the Middle East to us. Just the other day Michigan Muslims protested a Christian radio program and now Muslims have gotten the United Nations to ban the criticism of Islam in regards to human rights events. The effort to install this censorship was spearheaded by delegates from Egypt, Pakistan and Iran. Is it me, or should these countries even have a say on the Human Rights Commission? Countries where non-Muslims and even Muslims have little rights. Isn't freedom of speech a "human right"? I guess not under Islam....

Exclusive: Incredulous UN Bans Criticism of Islam
Leslie Sacks


The Human Rights Council at the United Nations has now banned any criticism regarding Sharia Law and human rights in the Islamic World. According to President Doru Romulus Costea - and following the efforts of delegates from Egypt, Pakistan and Iran - the Council will no longer tolerate criticism of either Sharia or specific fatwas in the name of human rights.

In many parts of the Islamic world, it is becomingly increasing clear not only that the Koran (the written record of the original oral transmissions of Mohammad’s life teachings) and the Hadith (the later delineations of those teachings) are considered sacrosanct in their perfection, but also the various implementations of these teachings, known as Sharia Law. No evolution or refinements are required. No matter that nearly every multitudinous Muslim sect or group has a differing interpretation of this God-given Sharia Law. Nor that the stoning to death of women, beheading of men, and all the 6th century niceties of feudal Arabia are still part and parcel of the immovable Islamic tradition. Never mind that Sunni will decimate Shia - and vice versa - over differences of interpretations far more modest than those between (modern) Catholics and Protestants, between Hindus and Buddhists. Islamic sect can war on Islamic sect, Arab can criticize Arab.

Because Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism and all other religions are imperfect, they are fair game for any and all attacks. Since Israel, Zionism, America and the Western World were created and developed outside the Islamic World and its divine perfection, they are likewise subject to criticism.

Now, not only has the Islamic God forbidden outside criticism of the Sharia Law, but the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) is its enjoined messenger on earth.

Of course, observers of the HRC should not be surprised. The ostensibly prestigious body has become a revolving door for countries with an ambivalent (or even well nigh invisible) relationship with freedom and democracy. In the two years following its replacement of the equally dictatorship-friendly Human Rights Commission, Algeria, Angola, Azerbaijan, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Egypt, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Tunisia have all been elected to the Council. As a majority of the Council’s resolutions are concerned with Israel, it would effectively cease functioning were it not for its compulsive focus on the Jewish state.

Due to this resolution the Council - and thus, perversely, the UN - is endorsing a worldview in which human interpretation and understanding has been placed beyond the pale of critical thinking and investigation as long as it’s part of Sharia Law or the Islamic tradition. Perhaps we should rename the United Nations and call it the “Nations of Islam - United in Unique and Ineffable Perfection.” Sounds appropriate.

Link to Article