April Fools: Assumptions and Superficiality Make Fools of You

Since the passage of the latest UNHRC resolution combating Islamophobia, the headlines keep flowing at an accelerating pace. Here is a sample

• New UN Resolution on Religious Freedom Drops 'Defamation' Concept
• Key US Accomplishments at the UN Human Rights Council
  • he “Combating Discrimination and Violence” resolution underscores the vital importance of protecting freedom of expression and ends the divisive debate over the highly problematic concept of “defamation of religions.”
• Islamic group drops demand that UN support 'religious defamation'
• An Anti-Blasphemy Measure Laid to Rest
• UNHCR | Refworld | The Demise of “Defamation of Religions”? Human ...
• Podcast: United Nations Abandons Global Blasphemy Code
• Groups Hail Changes to Pro-Islam Measure
• OIC urges respect for all faiths, efforts for peace: Haroon
• Why the US Must Stay on the UN Human Rights Council
  • The Council also dropped the longstanding though much-criticized “defamation of religions” concept, which in years past raised concerns of encroachment on freedom of expression. 

    What do the headline writers have in common?  They failed to read and comprehend  A/HRC/16/L.38 and the statements made in support of it in the HRC.

    ¶5 of the resolution "notes" the remarks of Secretary-General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu ... "and draws on his call on States to take the following actions". ... Did anyone bother to refer to that address?  The relevant paragraphs are reproduced below with emphasis added. 

Islamophobia. is a contemporary manifestation of racism and the phenomenon must be addressed in that context. It is matter of priority for the OIC that must not be treated as merely   a   numbers   game.   It   indeed  threatens   the   multi-cultural fabric ofour societies. Most importantly, it poses a clear   and   present   danger   to   international   efforts   geared towards peace stability and security, in both the regional as well as global context. Accordingly it needs to figure into the strategic calculations of the international community in our bid to bequeath a peaceful abode for the future generations.

    OIC has a principled position against defamation of any religion, dehumanization of the followers or denigration of
symbols sacred to all religions. The developments including the ban of construction of minarets, the attempts
towards burning of Quran and the use of Islamophobia as an instrument of electoral politics are ominous. There is an
urgent need to initiate and sustain what I would like to term as 'preventive cultural diplomacy'. We need to move
beyond event based calls for action to create spaces for structured engagement. The Human Rights framework
provides with a concrete basis for this engagement. We believe that the workshops on incitement to hatred under
the Durban mandate constitute and important avenue for a synthesis aimed at bridging the divergence of views. I
reiterate my call, during the 15th Session of the Council, for establishing an Observatory at the Office of the High
Commissioner to monitor acts of defamation of all religions or incitement to hatred or violence on religious grounds as
a first step towards concerted action at the international level. Let me also recall that I had outlined eight areas of
action for consideration by states, at both the national and international level, with a view to dealing with defamation
issue. I am pleased to note that the proposal has found some resonance.

    The OIC has shown flexibility in negotiations with our partners over the past couple of years and we would now
expect some reciprocity. The perception that supporting the resolution would throttle one's right to freedom
expression is only a myth. Freedom of expression will always be upheld but it cannot be allowed to be a tool to
use for inciting fear and hate.
     I would like to take this opportunity to say that I felt encouraged by some positive and constructive proposals in
finding a way forward on the text of the Resolution. If there is a genuine political will on the part of all to address the
issue of incitement of hatred against religions in earnest, I am confident that we can achieve a consensus.

Review the key phrases from that address to the HRC, what to they tell us about the objective, content and methodology of the resolution?

• Islamophobia
  • contemporary manifestation of racism
  • priority
  • threatens multicultural fabric
  • endangers peace & security
• defamation of religion
• denigration of symbols
• minaret ban
• Qur'an burning
• electoral Islamophobia
  • ominous
• preventive cultural diplomacy
• structured engagement
• human rights framework
• monitor acts of defamation
  • first step
• dealing with defamation
  • found resonance
• freedom of expression
  • tool for incitement
• incitement of hatred

    Lets take the last term first. Exactly what does that phrase mean?  How is it defined and exemplified?

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."

From that concrete example we discover that incitement includes exposing the nexus between Islamic scripture & oral tradition with terrorism & mob violence.

    Exactly why is defamation of Islam mentioned three times in a speech promoting a resolution which supposedly lays that concept to rest?  The resolution is presented as protecting individuals, not religions.  This address to the HRC demonstrates the fallacy of that presentation.

    It is not about the human rights of individuals, as pretended; it is about Islamophobia.  Burning the Qur'an is not an offense against individuals, it is an expression  of revulsion at the evil acts mandated by that accursed book. 

    A handful of congressional candidates exposed Islam in campaign speeches and advertisements.  That is not an offense against individuals, it is discussion of common sense public policy issues.  The subject matter of our political campaigns is not a proper subject of international legislation or resolutions.

    What race is Islam?  There are Muslims of all colors due to Islam's widespread conquest.  Of course, Islam is against racism, isn't it?

"Arabs are the most noble people in lineage, the most prominent, and the best in deeds. We were the first to respond to the call of the Prophet. We are Allah's helpers and the viziers of His Messenger. We fight people until they believe in Allah. He who believes in Allah and His Messenger has protected his life and possessions from us. As for one who disbelieves, we will fight him forever in Allah's Cause. Killing him is a small matter to us."
Tabari IX:69 Quoted by Craig Winn in The Prophet of Doom.

"It is your folly to fight the Apostle, for Allah's army is bound to disgrace you. We brought them to the pit. Hell was their meeting place. We collected them there, black slaves, men of no descent." The Life of Muhamad pg. 450, quoted by Craig Winn in The Prophet of Doom.

"Allah's Apostle said, 'You should listen to and obey your ruler even if he is a black African slave whose head looks like a raisin.'"
Sahih Bukhari 9.89.256

        Denigration of symbols?  They thought this was a human rights issue!  Only Allah has the right to be worshiped. Only Allah has the right to rule and govern.  If those are human rights, Allah must be human. When will he appear in court to testify against those who blaspheme against him?  When some goes to a book store, wastes $25. on a Qur'an and burns it, whose human rights are violated?  When I expose its content and curse it, what human rights are violated? 

    Exactly how does the Swiss minaret ban violate anyone's human rights?  The minaret is not a divine manifestation. Where is it mentioned in the Qur'an? Need I remind you that Shari'ah forbids Christians to build churches? 

    The defamation of Islam concept has not been dropped, neither has it been laid to rest. The headlines are a cruel hoax, not an April Fool joke. Those who wrote them are perennial fools, always blooming, without season. 

    Regional and international peace & security are at stake precisely because of the execrable doctrines of Islam laid down in Allah's accursed jihad, terror & genocide imperatives.  The clear and present danger is brought closer by failure to recognize it.  If our freedom of expression is impaired as Islam demands, then it will be closer still; we will be unable to sound the alarm. 

Libya: Who are we fighting? Who are we saving?!

"I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction." Those prophetic words come from Obama's biography.  Bare Naked Islam brought this interesting, fact filled video to my attention. In it we learn that one of the rebel leaders  was captured and held by our armed forces engaged in the battle against "Islamic extremism" aka al-Qaida.   We learn that the areas home to the rebels are heavily infested with "Islamic extremism" and supplied many of the suicide bombers who murdered civilians and our forces in Iraq. 

    We learn that those tribes are racists who are likely to exact genocidal revenge on Blacks who supported the regime. Clinton sent our armed forces to fight on the wrong side in Serbia. Obama sent them to fight on the wrong side in Libya.  There is no right side in Libya; we should let them kill each other without interference, then bomb the winners.

    No matter who wins in Libya, the outcome will leave that nation and its oil wealth in the hands of our enemies. The current policy is not only stupid and wasteful, it is treasonous.  We are risking lives and wasting  treasure in the wrong place, on the wrong side of a power rivalry that is none of our business and can have no good outcome. 

Defamation of Islam: Snatching Defeat from the Jaws of Victory

While USCIRF, Human Rights First and Christian news media dance around their bonfires emitting victory whoops, those with more common sense analyze the resolution and wait for the backfire.  I bring you tidings of the first backfire from International Islamic News agency  . [Emphasis added.]

Informed sources in the OIC General Secretariat in Jeddah stated clarified that the Islamic Group, represented in the OIC, in international fora did not back down from its position, pointing out that the Western countries, which lost all rounds of voting on the previous resolution on anti-defamation of religions, has made a major concession by accepting the new version of the resolution which aims to the same goals of promoting tolerance, non-discrimination and violence based on religion, which is exactly what the OIC is seeking in order to provide a decent living for Muslim communities in the West.

    The OIC did not back down, it was Western Civilization that lost the previous votes and made a major concession.  The new resolution maintains the  same goals as its predecessors.
    
    Return to  http://www.eyeontheun.org/assets/attachments/documents/Draft_Resolution_Defamation_Religions.pdf, which passed in the HRC last year and study ¶14, 15 & 16.  Exactly what are they demanding?  For those lacking the patience & diligence to do the research, here is my blog post detailing it: Defamation of Religions UNHRC March 25 ’10. The tactical objective of the series of resolutions is national & international legislation criminalizing all questioning and criticism of Islam. 

The sources pointed out that the West’s acceptance of the new resolution reflects an implied admission of a problem already exist within their communities.

    That is a clear restatement of the obvious; there was no need to say it. 

...to put an end to the campaign of hostility to Islam, better known in the west as Islamophobia.

Can you obtain a clue from Allah's word?  From Moe's word??  From Islamic law???

• 2:190. And fight in the Way of Allâh those who fight you, but transgress not the limits. Truly, Allâh likes not the transgressors. [This Verse is the first one that was revealed in connection with Jihâd, but it was supplemented by another (V.9:36)]. 
• 8:39. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allâh), then certainly, Allâh is All-Seer of what they do.
• 9:29. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. 
  • Sahih Muslim 19.4294 ...If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them...
  • Al-Hedaya Volume II, Book IX, Chapter 1, Page 141: The destruction of the sword is incurred by infidels, although they be not the first aggressors, as appears from various passages in the sacred writings which are generally received to this effect.
    • This marginal note found on page 140 sums it up nicely: "War must be carried on against the Infidels, at all times, by some party of the Muslims. "

    What did Allah command Muslims to do?  What did Moe tell them to do?  What does Islamic law say about who initiates & perpetuates the conflict?  Our attempts at self-defense  by raising the alarm are characterized as a "campaign of hostility" but Allah's imperative to conquer us is just, righteous & peaceful.  Yeah, right.

According to the sources, the U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had had invited the OIC to lead the efforts with both Washington and the European Union to draft a new resolution to ensure the foundations adopted by the previous resolution, giving a wider range of freedom of expression, but at the same time the sources confirmed that the decision (defamation of religions) has not been abandoned, and it is still valid, and can be resorted to if necessary.

    Our Secretary of State and an NGO are behind the new tactic.  Meet the new resolution, same as the old resolution.  Guess what they will introduce to the General Assembly in September. 

    While we are beset with an implacable existential foe, the best we can muster are Morons & traitors. Western Civilization is in great peril.