User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 12:28:32 AM EDT
 The Organization of Islamic Conference's goal is to inhibit criticism of Islamic jihadism by threats of violence. It's beginning to work. On February 9, the European Union called for a voluntary code of conduct to avoid offending Muslims. On the same day, Kofi Annan agreed with an OIC proposal mandating that a revised U.N. Human Rights Council "prevent instances of intolerance discrimination, incitement of hatred and violence . . . against religions, prophets, and beliefs." The language is intentionally very broad. http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0608,hentoff,72237,6.html Human Rights Groups Oppose Ban on Blasphemy in New Human Rights Council Charter UN Watch Geneva, Feb. 20, 2006 -- Three human rights groups today urged the President of the General Assembly and the United Nations to reject last-minute attempts to incorporate Islamic religious precepts into the charter of the world body's new human rights council. The three non-governmental organizations -- UN Watch in Switzerland, Freedom House in the U.S., and the Transnational Radical Party headquartered in Italy -- called on Jan Eliasson to reject amendments submitted by the 56-nation Islamic bloc that would insert a special reference to "actions against religions, prophets and beliefs." Delegates have been meeting for months to negotiate an overhaul of the UN's leading human rights body, with a final consensus document from Eliasson expected this week. Amid violent protests over the publication in Europe of newspaper cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad, the latest demand by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) has created a crisis in the talks. "This is a giant monkey wrench in the process, and that's what it was designed to be," said Hillel C. Neuer, executive director of the Geneva-based UN Watch, a watchdog group that has closely followed the talks. "To include this in the charter of the new human rights council would be appeasement to violence and taint the body at its birth," he said. Neuer noted that countries such as Egypt and Pakistan have been among the leading opponents of the reforms proposed by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan. "This move smacks of bad faith, a last-minute attempt to derail the train of progress that seeks enhanced scrutiny of states that abuse human rights." A number of leading human rights organizations say the current U.N. human rights commission has become a refuge for the worst violators, who secure seats on the commission to block action against them and shield their records of abuse. Libya, Cuba, Zimbabwe and Sudan are regular members on the commission. * * * * * * * * * * * * Last week, during the negotiations to establish a new Human Rights Council to replace the UN Commission on Human Rights, the Organization of the Islamic Conference tabled an amendment that would extend to the global level the prohibition against blasphemy that already exists in certain countries. The amendment calls on the new human rights body to "prevent instances of intolerance, discrimination, incitement of hatred and violence arising from any actions against religions, prophets and beliefs which threaten the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms." This initiative, undertaken by the 56 countries of the Organization of the Islamic Conference at the UN, has grave consequences and should be firmly rejected by the European Union, the United States and all countries that cherish freedom of expression, liberty and democratic values. Defense of religion should not be used as a smokescreen behind which to introduce a false equation between matters of religious conviction and those of international human rights. The amendment by the OIC should be completely rejected for the following reasons: The mandate of the Human Rights Council, once established, will be to promote human rights, including vital ones of freedoms of expression, the press, religion and belief. By contrast, the principal effect of the OIC proposal would be an increase in censorship of those cartoons, books, articles, works of art, or other manifestations of thought that are considered offensive to any religion, and the erosion of the freedom to dissent from a religion. One of the primary results of the OIC proposal would be to establish a justification for the violence and threats of violence that have occurred in recent days over the Danish cartoon depictions of Mohammed. In the past, artists, writers, editors and dissidents have also been threatened with death for depicting religions and religious figures in a light deemed unacceptable by certain groups. The OIC proposal seeks a UN and international imprimatur to whitewash this violence as merely acts of "excessive self-defense" against purportedly illegitimate provocations. The result of this proposal would be to increase threats and violence against all those who hold and express contrary religious views. Next week, the President of the General Assembly, Jan Eliasson, will present a draft resolution on the establishment of the new Human Rights Council. We urge the European Union, the United States and all democratic countries strongly to oppose the inclusion of this proposal, which would taint the Council from birth. If the price to pay for the establishment of the new Human Rights Council is curtailing freedom of expression and religion, and appeasing violence and threats of violence, it is not worth paying. http://www.juedische.at/TCgi/_v2/TCgi.cgi?target=home&Param_Kat=27&Param_RB=34&Param_Red=5046 |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 12:35:58 AM EDT
[#1]
Does that mean they will stop trying to persecute Christians and Jews? They do stuff according to their beliefs, defend themselves accordingly, etc etc, and the UN bashes them...or so I am told.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 12:49:00 AM EDT
[#2]
All of this is heading in one direction, and the end result will be East vs West, Islam vs everyone else, and the UN, thank God, will finally die because it will be proved as useless as a lot of us already know it is. Europe is finally starting to tire of the Islamic Revolution that is now coming to it's lands. PC is slowly dying. Things are going to be seen for what they really are. This cartoon charade is actuall helping to bring to light all of the illusions that the Euro's have been deceived by.
Unfortunately, we always seem to be behind the rest of the world, so we have quite a few years of PC liberal B.S. ahead of us. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 1:12:47 AM EDT
[#3]
Nope, the RoP® want the UN to adopt THEIR (the RoP®'s) Blasphemy laws and make them a world wide standard...and Kofi Kissass is supporting their call!
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 1:37:31 AM EDT
[#4]
Mr ROPer can kiss my ass.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 2:21:45 AM EDT
[#5]
I'd rather that Chrissy or Janet do it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 2:54:22 AM EDT
[#6]
Yeah, right.
I guess Judiasm won't be covered by this new law. Can't say it enough, time for the UN out of the US and the US out of the UN. Let them move to France. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 3:24:39 AM EDT
[#7]
Well, now we know who to utilize for "Operation Human Shield" when Jihad's ground forces officially go active on on our soil.
I digress, I guess I should just shut up and be a good white boy, & gracefully carry the cross huh? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 3:37:21 AM EDT
[#8]
This sounds like an attempt by the ROP to gain some sort of legal right to engage in even more conflicts around the world.
What religion is Kofi? Certainly not Christian. The shit that comes out of his mouth and the positions he supports, and fails to support, are simply disgraceful. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 3:55:09 AM EDT
[#9]
As a matter of fact he is (christian).
That is true. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 3:56:49 AM EDT
[#10]
Welcome to the new world order.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 4:01:14 AM EDT
[#11]
If Tim McVey wanted to make a statement, how come he didn't blow up the UN building?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 4:01:51 AM EDT
[#12]
Mr. Annan, sir?? What about those islamists who insist on making horrible statements about Jews and Christians? Do you plan to just let that go??? Oh! Wait!! Of COURSE you do.... You know, this is EXACTLY like the Cold War. There are a bunch of "elites" running around talking about how we need to "understand" the enemy, how we need to have "detant" with the enemy, and how we need to just adjust to the fact that they are here, and here to stay. Meanwhile the people who insist that we can and should DEFEAT the enemy get called stupid, unsophisticated, and intolerant. But who, I ask you, was right? The elites? Hardly. The damnable idiocy of trying to pacify and appease monsters OUGHT to be extinct by now, but the morons who are at high levels insist on doing EXACTLY as they did throughout the 20th century, and they are producing EXACTLY the same results. It is high time we stopped listening to those idiots. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 4:31:35 AM EDT
[#13]
I say we talk about it over a nice pig roast!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 4:41:24 AM EDT
[#14]
"The right to terror", now that's different.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 4:51:44 AM EDT
[#15]
And a keg of 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 4:59:58 AM EDT
[#16]
And dancin' wimmin!!!! |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 5:23:24 AM EDT
[#17]
Exactly! The UN would be effectively legitimising 'The Right to Terror' If the UN includes that proposal in it's charter, the RoP® would be able to claim it was exercising its lawful right of self defence against 'provocation' against 'Infidels' who have 'offended' them. ANdy |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 5:38:34 AM EDT
[#18]
If Knofi Annan is not careful, the Danes might draw an unfalttering editorial cartoon about him !!!
 Oh noes, the horror!  And then he'll see what it feels like to want to violents kill people over a mildly inappropriate cartoon. Oh wait, no he wont! Because despite being a bleeding-heart idiot, he's not an uncivilized savage. Moron. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 5:40:41 AM EDT
[#19]
No. He is much worse than that. He is the kind of idiot who makes it possible for the brutal slaughterers of men to THRIVE in the world. He and those of his ilk are ENABLERS OF GENOCIDE AND MURDER the world over. I swear the morons we have in the international policy scene today make Chamberlain look like an absolute fucking genius. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 5:42:27 AM EDT
[#20]
Well said. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 5:54:19 AM EDT
[#21]
I'm afraid no matter how you read that, its how it comes across. Agreeing to such verbage will only encourage social unrest and acts of terror thoughout the world. It would simply confirm that the Islamic exteremst have a weapon to hold the rest of the world hostage. Even agreeing to consider it was a very wrong move. Tj |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 6:37:30 AM EDT
[#22]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 6:40:01 AM EDT
[#23]
So, it should be international law that you can’t say or do anything that insults Islam. But, it’s OK for Moslem and Communist countries to outlaw any competing religion.
The UN is a great idea, as long as it understands it’s just a debating society where the world’s diplomats can get together and run their mouths. But the UN should never actually be in charge of anything. And apparently the UN doesn’t understand that. They see themselves as some kind of fledgling world government. Well, screw that. Why, in God’s name, would we want some country, who’s only domestically produced means of transportation eats hay, to have any say in what the United States does. Even if they had out best interests at heart, which they don’t, they simply haven’t demonstrated the ability to lead their nations out of the iron age. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 1:44:30 PM EDT
[#24]
I think you make rather a good point there! ANdy |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 2:10:01 PM EDT
[#25]
Isn't Annan a muslim?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 2:32:23 PM EDT
[#26]
This is what happens when you believe in "Peace at any Price". We all want peace. Who wants to spend their days having to fight for survival. However, when nothing is worth fighting for bad people will walk all over you. Kofi and all the rest don't want to get their lilly-white hands dirty sorting out the world's problems, they just want to issue statements, generate treaties and spend vast sums of money that ends up in the Swiss bank accounts of some of the most vile thugs in history. Why? To make the world a better place. What do they do when they see that the world doesn't become a better place? Blame the wealthy and demand more money and power to do the job. Google "Tobin Tax" to see how the UN would like to function. The Leauge of Nations was a knee-Jerk reaction to the horrors of WW1. Obviously nobdy learnt anything from that mess and thought they'd give it another go. After 50 UN years of violence, mayhem and murder, billions of dollars and whole forrests of treaties, protocols and memoranda the world is in a worse state than it was in 1914, before the start of the internationalist experiment. Its about time we tried something different, like maybe letting soverign nations sort out their own situations. </rant off> |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2006 2:36:40 PM EDT
[#27]
No, Mr Annan is a 'Christian' ANdy |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
