Murderous Muslims Whine about Negative Image at the UN.


I say muslims are responsible for islams negative image. By refusing to address the corrupt, deviant and murderous muslims spreading like cancer across the globe they are covering up the largest criminal empire in the history of mankind. Islam doesn’t need laws to protect it, it needs a civil war. If there are “good” muslims they need to rise up or shut up. Whining for the UN to cover up the crimes of islam is passive support for the same crimes that caused the negative image and passive support is still support.

I am all for muslims improving the image of islam – so get started already. You have extremists to hunt.

By Frank Jordans, 19 Nov 09, AP GENEVA – Four years after cartoons of the prophet Muhammad set off violent protests across the Muslim world, Islamic nations are mounting a campaign for an international treaty to protect religious symbols and beliefs from mockery – essentially a ban on blasphemy that would put them on a collision course with free speech laws in the West.

Documents obtained by The Associated Press show that Algeria and Pakistan have taken the lead in lobbying to eventually bring the proposal to a vote in the U.N. General Assembly.

If ratified in countries that enshrine freedom of expression as a fundamental right, such a treaty would require them to limit free speech if it risks seriously offending religious believers. The process, though, will take years and no showdown is imminent.

The proposal faces stiff resistance from Western countries, including the United States, which in the past has brushed aside other U.N. treaties, such as one on the protection of migrant workers.

Experts say the bid stands some chance of eventual success if Muslim countries persist. And whatever the outcome, the campaign risks reigniting tensions between Muslims and the West that President Barack Obama has pledged to heal, reviving fears of a “clash of civilizations.”
-The myth of islamophobia should never erase exposure of criminals using an ideology to justify, murder, slavery, pedophilia and child abuse. If the ideology didn’t support those things it would not need protection. Taken as individual crimes all of those crimes can be condemned but remind everyone that a seventh century madman encouraged it all and you are suddenly a hate filled islamophobe?

Four years ago, a Danish newspaper published cartoons lampooning the prophet Muhammad, prompting angry mobs to attack Western embassies in Muslim countries, including Lebanon, Iran and Indonesia. In a countermovement, several European newspapers reprinted the images.

The countries that form the 56-member Organization of the Islamic Conference are now lobbying a little-known Geneva-based U.N. committee to agree that a treaty protecting religions is necessary.

The move would be a first step toward drafting an international protocol that would eventually be put before the General Assembly – a process that could take a decade or more.

The proposal may have some support in the General Assembly. For several years the Islamic Conference has successfully passed a nonbinding resolution at the General Assembly condemning “defamation of religions.”
-I hope it passes because there is money to be made by suing to prove islam is a cult and not bound by rules governing religion. Muslims would be stupid to let this pass, they are only encouraging a long and painful exposure of mohammed and his lifestyle choices.

If the treaty was approved, any of the U.N.’s 192 member states that ratified it would be bound by its provisions. Other countries could face criticism for refusing to join.

The United States has declared it won’t accept international treaties that restrict its Constitution’s First Amendment right to free speech.

But there are signs the U.S. is worried by the Islamic Conference campaign. Behind the scenes it has been lobbying hard to quash the proposal, dispatching a senior U.S. diplomat to Geneva last month for talks described as akin to trench warfare.

“The U.S. presence can be significant in determining the whole destiny of the process,” said Lukas Machon, who represents the International Commission of Jurists at the U.N.

From a legal point of view, “the whole exercise is dangerous from A-Z because it’s a departure from the practice and concept of human rights,” Machon said. “It adds only restrictions.”

In a letter obtained by the AP, Pakistan said insults against religion were on the increase.

The Islamic Conference “believes that the attack on sacredly held beliefs and the defamation of religions, religious symbols, personalities and dogmas impinge on the enjoyment of human rights of followers of those religions,” the letter said. It was sent last month to members of the Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards, a temporary committee created to consider a previous anti-racism treaty.

In a separate submission to the committee, Pakistan proposed extending the treaty against racism to require signatories to “prohibit by law the uttering of matters that are grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion.”

It’s not clear who would decide what is considered grossly abusive, but each country’s criminal courts would likely have initial jurisdiction over that decision, according to Marghoob Saleem Butt, a Pakistani diplomat in Geneva who confirmed the campaign’s existence and has lobbied for the ban.

“There has to be a balance between freedom of expression and respect for others,” Butt said in a telephone interview.

“Taking the symbol of a whole religion and portraying him as a terrorist,” said Butt, referring to the Muhammad cartoons, “that is where we draw the line.”
-True, he was also a sick twisted pedophile and rapist.

One American expert with more than 20 years experience of the U.N. human rights system said the treaty could have far-reaching implications.

“It would, in essence, advance a global blasphemy law,” said Felice Gaer, a member of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom. The independent, congressionally mandated panel issued a report last week warning that existing laws against blasphemy, including in Pakistan, “often have resulted in gross human rights violations.”

In Egypt, blasphemy laws have been used to suppress dissidents, said Moataz el-Fegiery, executive director of the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies. Abdel Kareem Nabil, a blogger, was sentenced in February 2007 to four years in prison for insulting Islam and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.

He said reformists who reinterpret traditional Islamic texts have also become the target of blasphemy accusations.

More broadly, introducing laws to protect religions from criticism would weaken the whole notion of human rights, said Sweden’s ambassador to the U.N. in Geneva, Hans Dahlgren.

“Religions as such do not have rights – it’s people who have rights,” he said, adding that the European Union, whose presidency Sweden currently holds, would oppose attempts to limit freedom of speech.

The treaty goes against the grain of recent efforts by Western and Muslim countries to find common ground on human rights.

Only last month a joint U.S.-Egyptian resolution on freedom of expression won unanimous support in the U.N. Human Rights Council, much to the surprise of seasoned observers. “We will engage, and we’re going to keep engaging,” said Michael Parmly, spokesman for the U.S. Mission in Geneva.

In a telephone interview Wednesday, the Ad Hoc Committee’s chairman, Algerian Ambassador Idriss Jazairy, said concerns the treaty could stifle free speech have been “whipped up into a bugaboo.”

Failure to agree on a treaty would boost extremists in the Arab world, said Jazairy, a former envoy to Washington now considered a key player in the U.N.’s human rights forum.

“If we keep hitting this glass wall and say there’s nothing you can do about Islamophobia
You can do something about anti-Semitism but Islamophobia is out of bounds – you give an ideal platform for recruitment of suicide bombers,” he said.
-I have been accused of islamophobia for years but reality is everything I have ever said about islam came from islamic texts or the actions of professed followers of the worlds best known pedophile. I didn’t make mohammed a rapist of children he did and demanding that his crimes not be used to justify child abuse in today’s world is not hate. It is an attempt to save future victims.

Explore posts in the same categories: Abuse of Power, Freedom of Speech, muslim Intolerance, Muslim whining, Radical Islam, United Nations

11 Comments on “Murderous Muslims Whine about Negative Image at the UN.”

  1. gramfan Says:

    “I say muslims are responsible for islams negative image.”
    Absolutely!

    Just read on the IPT blog that they are targeting moderates also, not just infidels.

    If they pass that OIC piece on defamation we are in deeper trouble. We have already passed ‘deep’!

  2. Poopyhead Says:

    Someone needs to put a mirror in front of these clowns to show them who really is “defaming” them.

    The funny part about this “defaming religion” baloney is that if it passes and some day the islamaniacs capture the world they will still cry about defamation as each faction claims IT is the most pious and all the others are the defaming blasphemers.

    • gramfan Says:

      Of course they will. Just like they keep saying things will be peaceful when the whole world is islamic. What a joke!

      That’s only slightly comforting because it means they don’t all think exactly the same way.

      They have perfected the art of making up reasons to kill each other as well as us.

      I am reading up on the conflict between the Saudis and the Yeminis, and Iran is in there, naturally.

      They have made “victimhood” an artform.

  3. irishoaks Says:

    We are already facing this here in America. In Harlem NY, James David Manning has been harassed by the CIA and Homeland Security for his prolific preaching and statements about Barry/Barack “long legged Mack Daddy Soetoro/Obama the Keynan boy who usurps the White House. He truly feels from the visit, that he will soon be arrested. If so, the our free speech will be attacked most prominently.

  4. PB-in-AL Says:

    Since the language that I see being put forth for this treaty speaks of “defamation of religions“, could the islamic world be brought up on charges for defaming the Christian characterization of Jesus? How about their twisting of the Jewish Torah, would that be grounds enough? Would Hindis be able to bring suit against Longhorn Steakhouse for advertizing cooked cow? Could the Church of the Spaghetti Monster be able to sue The Olive Garden restaurant for promoting other pasta above the divine noodle? (I’m serious about the first 3, not so much about the Spaghetti Monster)

    This whole idea of the rights of “religion” gets silly in a big hurry, or dangerous, depending on how you look at it.

  5. islams not for me Says:

    Let the hilarity insue…

    If muslim governments want to issue laws to “protect religious symbols and beliefs from mockery – essentially a ban on blasphemy”

    Then shouldnt they start with thier own faith and reomve any websites, censor thier ‘dawah’ materals that defame Christians, Jews, Atheists etc?

    After all that is what they expect of us.

  6. tgusa Says:

    Do people know how long Christians and Christianity have been criticized, attacked, belittled, doubted, dismissed? Centuries. Christianity is based on faith. Obviously muslims don’t have any faith. Sorry muslims but you have been in the spotlight less than ten years. You just don’t stack up against Christianity.

  7. soraan Says:

    ermmm so the KKK is reflective of Christianity right ???

  8. islams not for me Says:

    Well gee soran care to explain how the KKK follow the teachings of Jesus?

    Or are you just making up another excuse to say “Islamaphobia is racism” when islam as a system isnt a race.

    • Ronin Says:

      If senior, respected Christian clerics praised and supported the actions of the KKK then the answer would have been yes but since they do not. It was just an idiot’s poor attempt at moral equivalency. Since most senior and respected islamic clerics do support violence in the name of allah it is not a comparison muslims should attempt.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 125 other followers