Saturday, June 04, 2005

UNCHR: Protecting Religion– Specifically Islam

In an astonishing move on 12 April 2005, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) moved from promoting respect for human rights to promoting "respect for all religions and their value systems". On Tuesday 12 April 2005, the UN Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) passed Human Rights Resolution 2005/3 entitled, "Combating Defamation of Religions". Islam On Line (IOL) reported it this way: "The United Nations Commission on Human Rights adopted on Tuesday, April 12, a resolution calling for combating defamation campaigns against Islam and Muslims in the West." IOL quotes Cuba's delegate who claimed that Islam has been the subject of a "very deep campaign of defamation". The resolution was pushed forward by Pakistan on behalf of the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC). It was put under Agenda Item 6 that deals with racism and all forms of discrimination." The OIC nations managed to gain majority support and the resolution was passed this year. Khan reports that the United States, United Kingdom and Israel were amongst those nations that voted against the resolution. Russia and China voted in favour while India was among those who abstained.


At June 04, 2005 6:38 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've found an interesting article on fighting "antiislamism".

Interesting times - yes that's the appropriate term.

At June 04, 2005 11:37 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

kledo, thanks for the link. This is precisely what Bat Ye'or describes in her book Eurobia. Have many Europeans read this book?

At June 04, 2005 11:47 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous, I've no idea who is Bat Ye'or and I haven't heard about her book up to now. But you really don't need books to see problems when walking "on a street" in a W. European city - if you want to see.

At June 04, 2005 11:57 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Islam On Line (IOL) reported it this way: "The United Nations Commission on Human Rights adopted on Tuesday, April 12, a resolution calling for combating defamation campaigns against Islam and Muslims in the West."

This news can be taken as either depressing or a sign that the mullahs are getting worried.

The excercise of freedom of expression is really upsetting muslims around the world. Their dispicable religion, which they naturally assume is good, as most muslims just assume it to be so, without knowing much about it, is under attack. So their leaders now try to stifle freedom by going to the UN, as it is one organisation where they can get anything passed. Their hope is that governments in the West will take the UNHCR resolution, and use it as reason to pass religious hate speech legislation designed to "protect" muslims. This can be a problem in Europe, Britain included, where the the government is keen to pass such legislation. Note that Christians, Hindus and Buddhists, all of them under severe persecution in the islamic world, are not calling for "religious hate crime" legislation.

Truth of course is the best weapon available to bring the downfall of islam, and hence the clamour by islamists to have criticism of islam, and more particularly, mohammed, classed as a hate crime. They intend to drive this home by rioting for even the slightest criticism of islam, and hence bring pressure on the political elite, who for obvious reasons, wish to have a quiet nation and life. In addition, the EU constitution limited the role of national governments to act on behalf of their citizen's concerns.

Now there is hope that national perspectives can be brought back to prominence. The failure of the EU constitution to pass ratification has elicited several reasons from the media elite, each as bizarre as the next. In most cases the reasons given are that

1. The French were voting against Chirac or they were agsinst the Anglo-Saxon model etc

Such explanations are an insult to the electorate, as if the French are simple peasants and do not know what they are voting for.

2. The Dutch were really voting against the single currency, as it cheated them or they were against etc etc..

Such explanations are an insult to the electorate, as if the French and Dutch are illiterate peasants and do not know what they are voting for.

No one suggested that there could be disquiet because of the religion that we must not mention.

Things are now moving fast. I believe there will be calls for the repatriation of powers that were handed to Brussells, particularly on border controls, immigration measures and even the currency.

Things are going to get mighty interesting from now on. Muslims in Europe, were very keen on the constitution for obvious reasons, though not so keen to have it adopted in muslim countries. Interesting.


At June 05, 2005 12:09 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

When Islamic terrorists cease sawing off the heads of infidels and strapping on bomb belts to murder innocents, greater respect for Moslems will be forthcoming. It's called cause and effect.

At June 05, 2005 12:12 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Good link.

I'm sad to say that I have no trust in the PM of Turkey. He is an islamist who has modified his stance slightly to get into power.

This link is interesting to read as well.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's has been successful in getting anti-islamism as equivalent to racism. But who is to determine what is anti-islam and what is anti-islamism. You can take it that it will be defined by the severity of the riots. In effect any criticism of islam or islamism, will be taken as hatred against the religion and prosecuted. This definition of radical islam as Islamism, a concept invented by Daniel Pipes I believe, is now becoming a liability. Islam is a whole - all muslims agree on that. There is no dichotomy of islam and islamism.

Thanks for the link. The information in it, needs to be posted as widely as possible.


At June 05, 2005 12:31 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


A more careful read of the article indicates that islamism and islam are not differentiated at all. Islamism is not regarded as the radical part of islam but quite integral to it.

In effect this is a far more dangeruous agreement then I thought at first reading, and to which the the ignorant dhimmi elite of Europe have signed up to.

The question that arises is how come this so-called political elite, are so very ignorant of the basic facts of life. Civilisation is under threat, and all we have is a bunch of dhimmis to protect us. Great.

It is for this reason that blogs such as this and others, are so important. Making people aware of the civilisational threat is a task that has been left to us, the EU NAY sayers, the dumb ignorant illiterate peasants of Europe.

Keep it up.



At June 05, 2005 12:36 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

I'm glad you like the blog. I will try to maintain it and increase its reach. My country is facing national elections in September, and the Socialists are in the lead. I will write some more essay in Norwegian and make them all freely available to anybody who wants to use them.

At June 05, 2005 2:10 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Must read article in the Times, though defeatist in its prognosis.

Wake up, the West is losing,,176-1631924,00.html

Indeed wake up..The bells are tolling and they toll for thee.

What the hell needs to be done to wake the people. 9/11, Madrid, Beslan, beheadings while chanting allahu akbar, Bali, massacres of Christians in Sulawesi, Nigeria, nothing seems to wake the political elite. There is no end to the cries of the distressed and bereaved at the hands of the islamic fanatics, and yet we slumber on, and our elites drone on. Never, not even in the dark days before WWII, has there been such silence. Or is it confusion and disarray? Whatever it is, we had better get our act together and defeat this idiotic religion.

I know we will win just as soon as we wake up.


At June 05, 2005 7:17 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

That officially does it!

I am THROUGH with every single one of those "good" organizations, they've all been dissapointments to me/us: the charities turned out to only benefit dictators and their own administration due to clumsy organization, Human rights watchers turned out to be officially politically leftwinged and moreover fanatical at that, and UNHCR is protecting a religion from criticism even though this is not even a part of its given mission - and a religion that more than any, to my mind, has CAUSED more refugees than any other religion!
(oh well, i guess they're protecting their business?)

I'm writing a post on this one day (later though, exams for now) but i just want to say how damn sad and mad it makes me that all those instituions who were supposed to be for the GOOD of humans, have turned out to be selfish and political players.

What is happening to the world these days!!?? ;-(

At June 05, 2005 4:18 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

fjordman - I love your blog. Anything you could do to extend its reach would be a great service to mankind.

DP111 - I agree with your assessment. It's a sign that the mullahs and Islamists in general are getting worried. Islam as an ideology cannot withstand the harsh light of exposure because its a an obvious lie and a fraud - a political ideology of Arab imperialism very thinly disguised as a religion. Because its a lie it depends on brutal force - including punishment for blasphemy and death for apostasy - in order to maintain its hold on its hapless masses.

But for the past 1400 years there was no such thing as the internet! Of course the islamists are making use of the same technology to recruit people to their cause. So the information war is on.

Should the elites ever succeed in silencing criticism of islam, however (which every sane person needs to fight), it strikes me that the game isn't up. Whatever happened to irony?

How about public rallies "celebrating" the ROP, with nothing on signs and banners but every violent, misogynistic quote from the Koran itself, accompanied by bloody pictures illustrative of Shariah law as actually implemented?

No criticism, whatsoever. Rather celebration! Come! Join with us as we celebrate the religion of peace?! It may be easier to silence criticism than to silence irony.

Or - what precisely constitutes a religion anyway? If push comes to shove, I may start hearing voices myself....


At June 05, 2005 4:48 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've chosen this quote for my placard at the ROP rally:

"“for them (the unbelievers) garments of fire shall be cut and there shall be poured over their heads boiling water whereby whatever is in their bowels and skin shall be dissolved and they will be punished with hooked iron rods" (Koran 22:19-22)

Come, join me in celebrating the religion of peace!


At June 05, 2005 7:22 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hello Caroline,

I think that the most important thing is to break the silence. The form is secondary and depends only on you. There is a lot of ways how to deal with our situation and only time will tell which one is the most effective ...

At June 06, 2005 5:02 AM, Blogger felix said...

I agree Caroline that exposing islamic thoughts and practice to the general public may help defeat radical islam. However, many people are afraid to do that. Look what happened to Theo Van Gogh in the Netherlands (who got killed), or the newspaper reporter in Nigeria who wrote that Mohammad would have liked one of the contestants in a beauty contest (they put out a fatwa on her and she had to go in to protective custody), or Salman Rusdie. In Holland, Hirsi Ali and Geert Wilders are in protective custody for criticizing Islam. It's like the Mafia came up with this religion.

Good luck.

At June 06, 2005 4:39 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Remember that Mr. Selbourne's new book about Islam and the Islamic revival has been banned by British publishers:


Because he's right:

This vile and primitive cult is on its way to destroy 3.000 years of Western civilization thanks to a bunch suicidal and spineless dhimmis in Brussels, Paris or London...

At June 06, 2005 5:56 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


In my opinion there are three countries in Europe which are exceptionally hard hit by political correctness: United Kingdom, Sweden and Belgium.

In order to illustrate the situation in the United Kingdom I would like to suggest you to read the folloving article: "Britain is enriched beyond measure by the talent, contribution and hard work of British Muslims up and down the country."

Quote author:
Michael Howard, Conservative Party leader, United Kingdom

I think this is good example how some so-called "conservative" parties are able to deal on the dangers of islamism and mass immigration.

At June 06, 2005 8:34 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hmmm looks like the jews had the same idea, but the arabs beat them to it!

Proposal for UN condemnation of Anti Semitism

Ynet - Nov. 19 - 2002

For the first time in history, a proposal for UN specific condemnation of Anti Semitism will be brought forth today (Wednesday, Nov. 19) by Ireland, who is considered traditionally hostile to Israel in matters of diplomacy and security.

Israeli minister of foreign affairs, Silvan Shalom, met on Tuesday with his Irish colleague, Brian Kuan in Brussles. Shalom asked Kuan to add to the UN annual resolution condemning racial and religious intollerance specific mentioning of anti Semitism, due to the recent rise of the phenomena in the world.

The Irish foriegn minister, whose country starts its term as president of the EU next month, rejected the idea of uniting the two issues in one resolution. Instead, he suggested that Ireland will propose a separate resolution, one which exclusively deals with anti Semitism.

Ynet reports that it got hold of a letter written by Kuan to all EU foriegn ministers, in which he proposes that EU, as one body, will initiate the proposal for a UN resolution that condemns anti Semitism exclusively. This is in order to "clearly state that Europe rejects all kinds of anti Semitism, in its various forms and expressions."

Diplomatic sources told Ynet that such a resolution forms more than a symbolic measurement. "Its an acknowledgement of the problem of anti Semitism by world in general and Europe in specific, and a statement of intention to deal with the problem."

Dori Gold, former Israeli ambassador to the UN, told Ynet that if such a resolution will pass it willl have great significance in the int'l diplomatic arena. According to Gold, the Arab states refer to the UN as a source for legitimacy of their anti Israeli claims. Golds adds that although UN resolutions do not create binding legal precedence, they are used as reference in legal procedures throughout the world and may set norms that are proceeded by actions.


Post a Comment

<< Home