“Just when you think the United Nations couldn’t get anymore useless, something called the Organization of Islamic Conference, -which is a fancy way of saying “a Saudi funded cartel of Islamic dictatorships”- have been allowed to hijack the United Nations Human Rights Council thus rendering it instantly and permanently worthless.
Nevertheless, with all the plotting predictability of a Hollywood car chase, their first order of business was to pass a resolution, banning criticism of Islam and sharia, and by extension of their own barbaric regimes, with all the stonings and beheadings, amputations and female genital mutilation that so disgusts everyone in the civilized world.
In other words they’ve tried to make it “illegal to criticize evil”.Â A bit like abolishing penicillin because the bacteria are offended.”
At UN, US fights Islamic attempt to snuff out free speech
* Watch out: if the Manchurian candidate, the Kenyan Arab Muslim Barrack Hussein Obama gets in, we will end up living in a giant theocratic prison camp. Because the Bommah Â has already declared that, if push comes to shove, he ‘will stand with the Muslims’- and for that, for this flake, for this worthless piece of garbage, that asssole Oprah has been ‘crying her eyelashes off’…
“U.S. fights Islamic anti-defamation push,” by Betsy Pisik for theÂ Washington Times, September 2:
UNITED NATIONS | The Bush administration, European governments and religious rights organizations are mounting a new effort to defeat a General Assembly resolution that demands respect for Islam and other religions but has been used to justify persecution of religious minorities.
The resolution, called “Combating Defamation of Religion,” is sponsored by the 57-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC)Â and has been approved by the world body annually since 2005. It comes up for renewal this fall.
U.S. officials said they hope to persuade moderate Muslim nations – among them Senegal, Mali, Nigeria and Indonesia – to reject the measure, which lacks the force of law but has provided diplomatic cover for regimes that repress critical speech. The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the topic.
Religious rights groups say other U.N. measures, including statements by the Human Rights Council in Geneva, replicate the language of the resolution.
“Before, it was one resolution with no impact and no implementation,” said Felice Gaer, chairman of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, a bipartisan federal body that investigates abuses and proposes policies to advance “freedom of thought, conscience and religion.”
“Now we are seeing a clear attempt by OIC countries to mainstream the concept and insert it into just about every other topic they can,” Miss Gaer said. “They are turning freedom of expression into restriction of expression.”
European governments are also concerned.
The European Center for Law and Justice filed a brief with the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights in June warning that such anti-defamation resolutions “are inÂ direct violation of international law concerning the rights to freedom of religion and expression.”
U.S. officials working on human rights said theÂ resolutions are being used to justify harsh blasphemy laws in countries such as Pakistan, Egypt, Sudan and Afghanistan.
The OIC said most of the language in the Combating Defamation of Religion resolution has been used in conventions on cultural and civil rights, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and resolutions to combat racism.
The densely worded document is meant to safeguard religious ideas and allow religious minorities to lead “a life of respect … free of coercion, fear or threat,” the OIC office in Geneva told The Washington Times in an e-mail. The office noted that U.N. human rights rapporteurs have been reporting an increase in the number and intensity of “racio-religious” discrimination.
Incidents cited include remarks last year about Islam by Pope Benedict XVI, the publication of cartoons in Danish newspapers that contained unflattering images of the prophet Muhammad and religious rulings issued against iconoclastic Muslim writers such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Salman Rushdie.
The most recent version of the anti-defamation resolution, passed by the world body in December, cites the erroneous connection of Islam to terrorism and “stresses the need to effectively combat defamation of all religions and incitement to religious hatred, against Islam and Muslims in particular.”…
It’s a jihadist initiative, meant to stifle discussion of the elements of Islam that jihadists use to justify violence and supremacism, at a time when Islamic supremacists are on the march as they have not been for centuries.