The race card by Arab Muslim bigots at the UN (Durban II)
Even though it’s really Islamism that is the epitome of bigotry <http://www.terrorismawareness.org/islamo-fascism/73/islamic-bigotry/>, and it’s Arabism that Equals Racism against all non-Arabs, including: Kurds, Berbers, Jews (not only inside Israel), Persians, Africans (not only the millions of victims in Sudan), etc. <http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/authors.aspx?GUID=c5a848fc-9632-41e6-939a-83baf99c48a9> < http://www.gzyn.com/cmp/contentReadingActions.do?method=readArticle&id=31&edition=1&title=Arab+Racism > and as an Arab admitted the true Nature of the Twin Fascisms of Islamism and Pan-Arabism’ that dominates the Arab Muslim world <http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Area=sd&ID=SP83504&Page=archives>, yet the UN, in its Durban proclaiming to be an anti-racism forum, bows to the Arab Muslim lobby control to ignore the above but concentrate rather on anti-Arabism and Islamophobia, both terms which have been used as tools by Islamists to gage any criticism of intolerance in the Arab-Muslim world (and radicals have been politicizing genuine feelings, to call true fear of terror as “racism” < http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1167467807212 >).
Kicking Israel Around [Anne Bayefsky]
April 07, 2009
What’s behind all this? The OIC countries are locked in a struggle with EU states over the ability to stifle free speech (such as “defaming” Islam) in the name of protecting religion. The Russian move helps the OIC nations by letting them use the anti-semitism clause as a bargaining chip, to be played in exchange for the EU’s allowing free-speech restrictions. In a related issue, the Danish are unhappy with the mention of something the U.N. invented called “anti-Arabism.” That phrase has been inserted in the paragraph about discrimination in the form of Islamophobia, Christianophobia and anti-semitism. But the rest of the EU has told the Danes to get lost, on the grounds that if the EU proposes deleting anti-Arabism, the OIC will insist on deleting anti-semitism. As EU officials explain to observers, “We want to show restraint.”
Human Rights of Non-believers, Apostates and Free-thinkers
“The terms belief and religion are to be broadly construed”.
General Comment 22 on Article 18, United Nations Human Rights Committee, 1993.
We find paragraph 10 of the draft outcome document to be deeply flawed in that it singles out only Christians, Jews and Muslims as named victims of “phobias”. Furthermore, while the term “Islamophobia”, for example, is undefined, it is used to falsely equate disdain for or opposition to Islam with intolerance of, or violence and hatred towards the believer.
Secondly, no mention is made in paragraph 10 of discrimination, intolerance and violence towards non-believers, Polytheists, apostates, and free-thinkers. Yet the human rights of non-believers, free-thinkers and those of other faiths are systematically denied in many parts of the world, and many face discrimination, abuse and even death.
We urge delegations to recognise that all are entitled to protection from discrimination, whatever their belief or lack of belief. We therefore respectfully suggest either that the list of specific types of discrimination be deleted from paragraph 10, or the list be expanded to include non-believers, polytheists, apostates and free-thinkers.
We are equally concerned that anti-Arabism is included in the list, while no mention is made of the anti-Westernism endemic in many parts of the world. Again, we would respectfully suggest that either the reference to anti-Arabism be deleted or that the list should be extended to include anti-Westernism.
Our preferred text, which we respectfully offer to delegations, then becomes:
10. Recognizes with deep concern the negative stereotyping of religions, beliefs and non-beliefs, and the global rise in the number of incidents of racial or religious intolerance and violence.
With, as an alternative:
10. Recognizes with deep concern the negative stereotyping of religion, beliefs, and non-beliefs, and the global rise in the number of incidents of racial or religious intolerance and violence, including Judeophobia, Christianophobia, Islamophobia, anti-Arabism, anti-Westernism and intolerance and violence towards non-believers, polytheists, apostates and free-thinkers.
“Defamation of Religion”
The Islamic Group (Pakistan) stated, “Defamation is not about freedom of expression, but the abuse of this freedom.”
Iran was very active throughout the week, taking the floor more than any other country on this issue. It consistently advocated “elaborating” legislation to fight racism, proposing further, “Model legislation on the necessity of upholding respect for…reputation, public morals as well as incitement to racial and religious hatred [code for defamation].”
As the debate on defamation was getting underway, the chair asked two journalists to leave the room, explaining that members of two regional groups had requested that the cameras be removed from the room in that they have had adequate time for filming. The journalists were from the French-German cultural channel ARTE and were making a documentary about the human rights debate at the UN. Pakistan, South Africa, and Egypt expressed their concerns that these journalists would engage in “selective interpretation” of the discussion.
Pakistan wanted to include even more language to equate counter-terrorism with racism. Pakistan, Algeria, and Iran also wanted the words, “Islamophobia” and “anti-Arabism” to remain in the document.