A perverse ‘Process’

Hillary’s free-speech follies- By NINA SHEA

The OIC’s purpose is to criminalize “incitement to hatred and violence on religious grounds.” 

Clinton: With this week’s conference, foolishly encouraged Muslim-world push to treat dissent from Islam as hate speech or worse.

“Test of consequences” means if you draw a Muhammad cartoon, do or say anything that enrages Muslims, (there are a million things that enrage Muslims, including your infidel existence) however, if you don’t submit to muselmanic mores its your fault because you are making the Muslim run amok, blow stuff up or fly jets into buildings, got it?

Resolution 16/18 was hailed as a victory by Clinton, because it calls on countries to combat “intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization” based on religion without criminalizing free speech — except in cases of “incitement to imminent violence.”  But if the criterion for determining “incitement to imminent violence” is a new “test of consequences,” then this is nothing but an invitation to stage Muslim “Days of Rage” following the slightest perceived offense by a Western blogger, instructor, or radio show guest, all of whom will be held legally liable for “causing” the destruction, possibly even if what they’ve said is merely a statement of fact.  The implications of such prior restraint on free speech would be chilling (which is precisely the point).

In fact, the “test of consequences” is already being applied rigorously in European media and courts, where any act or threat of violence — whether by a jihadist, insane person, or counter-jihadist — is defined as a “consequence” of statements that are critical of some aspect of Islam and, therefore, to be criminalized.  Recent trials of Dutch political leader Geert Wilders, Austrian free speech champion Elizabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, and Danish Islamic expert Lars Hedegaard (as well as the witch hunt for “instigators” that followed the murderous attacks by Norwegian blogger Anders Behring Brevik) all attest to the extent of these “hate speech” laws’ oppressive pall over what is left of the European Enlightenment.  Now, if the OIC and the Obama administration have their way, it’s America’s turn.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Wednesday ended the “Istanbul Process,” a three-day, closed-door international conference hosted by the State Department on measures to combat religious “intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization.”

Related:

• Emulating their Sharia Partner, the OIC, State Department Detains Andrea Lafferty as “Threat,” “The very restriction on free speech the UN Resolution was pushing is exactly what they used against me”
• “Peer pressure and shaming.”–-Willary Clitman sucks and swallows OIC agenda whole

Continue reading Shrillary's Free Speech Follies →

A Dangerous Development.

Pamela Geller, WND Column: Does Obama want a universal caliphate? (Pamela Geller)

An update from this:

State Department meeting with OIC to discuss free speech restrictions

Shameful indeed: the Obama State Department is meeting today with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation to discuss ways to sweep away our fundamental protection against tyranny: the freedom of speech. More on this story. “A Shameful State Department Initiative,” by Pamela Geller in the American Thinker, December 12:   (More on State Colluding with OIC on free speech restrictions)

The Legal Project recently reported that the Obama Administration would be holding meetings this week in Washington on “implementing” UN Human Rights Council Resolution 16/18. (See Why is the Obama Administration Giving the OIC a Say in Our Right to Free Speech?) On December 13^th, Nina Shea, Director of Hudson Institute’s Center for Religious Freedom, reported on the first session of the three-day, closed-to-the-public conference called “The Istanbul Process.”

Continue reading The Istanbul Process, a Shameful State Department Initiative →