AI-Jane Political, And Economic Forums

Full Version: Islamic states seek world freedom curbs
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Quote:Islamic states seek world freedom curbs: humanists
By Robert Evans

GENEVA (Reuters) - Islamic states are bidding to use the United Nations to limit freedom of expression and belief around the world, the global humanist body IHEU told the U.N.'s Human Rights Council on Wednesday.

In a statement submitted to the 48-nation Council, the IHEU said the 57 members of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) were also aiming to undermine the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

"The Islamic states see human rights exclusively in Islamic terms, and by sheer weight of numbers this view is becoming dominant within the U.N. system. The implications for the universality of human rights are ominous," it said.

The statement from the IHEU, the International Humanist and Ethical Union, was issued as the U.N.'s special investigator on freedom of opinion and expression argued in a report that religions had no special protection under human rights law.

Ambeyi Ligabo, a Kenyan jurist, said in a report to the Council limitations on freedom of expression in international rights pacts "are not designed to protect belief systems from external or internal criticism."

MOUNTING SUCCESS

But this argument is rejected by Islamic states, who say outright criticism -- and especially lampooning -- of religion violates the rights of believers to enjoy respect.

The IHEU statement and Ligabo's report came against the background of mounting success by the OIC, currently holding a summit in Dakar, in achieving passage of U.N. resolutions against "defamation of religions."

Although several such resolutions have been adopted by the two-year-old Council and its predecessor since 1999, in December the U.N.'s General Assembly easily passed a similar one for the first time over mainly Western and Latin American opposition.

The OIC -- backed by allies in Africa and by Russia and Cuba -- has been pushing for stronger resolutions on "defamation" since a global controversy arose two years ago over cartoons in a Danish newspaper which Muslims say insult their religion.

The "defamation" issue has become especially sensitive this year as the U.N. prepares to celebrate in the autumn the 50th anniversary of the 1948 Universal Declaration, long seen as the bedrock of international human rights law and practice.

The OIC has been actively promoting its own 1990 Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam, which it argues is complementary to the Universal Declaration but which critics like the IHEU say negate it in many areas.

Humanists, who include believers of many faiths supporting separation of religion and state as well as atheists and agnostics, say the "defamation" drive is part of an effort to extend the Cairo declaration to the international sphere.

The IHEU statement argued the December General Assembly resolution means states "may now legislate against any show of disrespect for religion, however they may choose to define 'disrespect'."
Why not just let the Islamists and Collectivist Kooks HAVE the UN, and just start another organization: The Liberty League? Withdraw all funding to that worthless body, throw them out of the US, and allow them to destroy themselves and IT to their heart's desire.

Then only allow those countries that espouse Individual personal Liberties as members to this new organization. That's my suggestion.
Something has to be done soon failing which these assholes will have complete control of the UN.
Well, it will only be that one set of a**holes is being replaced with another. Will China and Russia get fed up with the new set? How else would the plug ever be pulled on the UN?
John L Wrote:Why not just let the Islamists and Collectivist Kooks HAVE the UN, and just start another organization: The Liberty League? Withdraw all funding to that worthless body, throw them out of the US, and allow them to destroy themselves and IT to their heart's desire.

Then only allow those countries that espouse Individual personal Liberties as members to this new organization. That's my suggestion.
Hypocrisy in action. :lol: Remember when you deleted one of my posts because it contained the medical term 'masturbation'? You know, in general, its not you who guards the freedom of expression. And you folks must not be, being worse than radical Muslims.
quadrat Wrote:
John L Wrote:Why not just let the Islamists and Collectivist Kooks HAVE the UN, and just start another organization: The Liberty League? Withdraw all funding to that worthless body, throw them out of the US, and allow them to destroy themselves and IT to their heart's desire.

Then only allow those countries that espouse Individual personal Liberties as members to this new organization. That's my suggestion.
Hypocrisy in action. :lol: Remember when you deleted one of my posts because it contained the medical term 'masturbation'? You know, in general, its not you who guards the freedom of expression. And you folks must not be, being worse than radical Muslims.

I really don't have any idea as to what you are referring to "Q". If this makes you feel 'right', so be it.
The communists have always run the UN,why not some of their Islamic friends? We shouldn't concern ourselves with it,just move it out of the US borders.
Coalitions of nation-states have always aligned to form partnerships of one sort or another. There is nothing sacred about the United Nations. It is no better than two small countries getting together to form a pact on fishing responsibilities.

The U.N., however, has reneged on simple pacts to endorse big, complicated ones that cause as much harm as good. Because they are no longer a major source for good, competition is due to arise.
Truthfully,the UN could never have worked at all. States have different self interests. The 1 time it worked was when the reds invaded South Korea and then only because Stalin's agent failed to show up!

Not that we needed it then,that was just political pap anyway.
WTF is your problem with the "Islamistic" Muslim states? They're all conservative states, with a conservative interpretation of Islam, ruled by conservative dignitaries or politicians, that's the same conservative vermin like you.
Ahmedinejad is a conservative, Bin Laden is, that Hamas guy is. Just to name a few. Why can our vermin and their vermin not get along with each other? The truth is they do, benefiting each other, helping each other to grow stronger in their respective countries.
Islamic Conservatism is not Western Conservatism.

If one does not see the obvious differences in Culture, Civilization, and History, it only proves you're a tard. Explains many things in one fell swoop.

Of course, pointing out the obvious is also not neccesary.
You have to excuse 'Q' he now longer lives in the West.
As I have been stating, for some time now, that is why the word "Conservative/Conservatism" is a Terrible way to express one's political affilitation. It is totally ambiguous and misleading. It's a absolute waste of words and thinking. That is why I always preface it with "so called", because that is all it really is: "so called".
Gunnen4u Wrote:Islamic Conservatism is not Western Conservatism.

If one does not see the obvious differences in Culture, Civilization, and History, it only proves you're a tard. Explains many things in one fell swoop.

Of course, pointing out the obvious is also not neccesary.
Is it? Look at what is connecting you and them, not the superficial differences, but where you and they are the same at the very roots. It's the hypocrisy, the deriving of values from obsolete religions and nationalism as a smoke screen, but in reality the lowest impulses man is capable of. Greed, hate, selfishness, ruthlessness, vengeance. It's the refusal to embrace progress, freedom, liberal values, free thinking, equality, the same opportunities for all people. The refusal to benefit the whole society and not only a small clique of elites.
John L Wrote:
quadrat Wrote:
John L Wrote:Why not just let the Islamists and Collectivist Kooks HAVE the UN, and just start another organization: The Liberty League? Withdraw all funding to that worthless body, throw them out of the US, and allow them to destroy themselves and IT to their heart's desire.

Then only allow those countries that espouse Individual personal Liberties as members to this new organization. That's my suggestion.
Hypocrisy in action. :lol: Remember when you deleted one of my posts because it contained the medical term 'masturbation'? You know, in general, its not you who guards the freedom of expression. And you folks must not be, being worse than radical Muslims.

I really don't have any idea as to what you are referring to "Q". If this makes you feel 'right', so be it.
Solly, my bad. Had too many windows open and got lost. Intented to point to Palladin's graphic description of the reproduction act of catholic priests. :lol: http://ai-jane.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7763
quadrat Wrote:Is it? Look at what is connecting you and them, not the superficial differences, but where you and they are the same at the very roots. It's the hypocrisy, the deriving of values from obsolete religions and nationalism as a smoke screen, but in reality the lowest impulses man is capable of. Greed, hate, selfishness, ruthlessness, vengeance. It's the refusal to embrace progress, freedom, liberal values, free thinking, equality, the same opportunities for all people. The refusal to benefit the whole society and not only a small clique of elites.

lol

Did you get wet from that?

What a rant, and the obvious is seen (uneducated). Someone else is pretty hateful around here, eh? Not to mention any other faults.