Muslim nations seek ban on insults in UN
The Washington Times reports on a movement in the United Nations which seeks to ban insults and muzzle freedom of speech in member nations;
Turkey heads the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, a body of 57 nations, which has long pushed for a U.N. resolution condemning the “defamation of religion.”
Nonbinding versions of the resolution have been adopted, but the effort was crushed last year by religious groups and human rights activists who argued that it represented a dangerous step toward an international law against free speech.
The debate has been reignited by “Innocence of Muslims,” a crudely produced film made in the United States that has sparked fury in the Muslim world. Protesters have breached the walls at U.S. embassies and desecrated American flags in sometimes violent demonstrations. A protest in the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi ended with the deaths of the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans.
The article continues that Hillary Clinton has appealed to Muslims to show “dignity” in dealing with the film. I’m sure the word “dignity” needed to be explained to more than a few people who had just heard the word for the very first time.
I guess no one noticed that a law against insults would pretty much prevent Iran president Amahdinejad or Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez from speaking at the UN ever again, or from speaking in public ever again, actually.
“We call for legislation or a resolution to criminalize contempt of Islam as a religion and its prophet,” Emad Abdel Ghaffour, who heads the [Egyptian] ultra-orthodox sect’s Nour political party, told Reuters over the weekend.
Yeah, the UN can’t control the proliferation of nuclear arms to terrorist nations, but they’re supposed to control public speech.
Category: Terror War, United Nations
Funny how the media is avoiding words like “censorship” and “banned films” or “banned books,” because that is what the Democrats are politely offering. They are treating Islam as a special case suddenly when it comes to freedom of expression.
Who is going to decide what is offensive and what isn’t? An Islamic council? Government? An imam? I suggest that these self-appointed “protectors of the faith” who have never ventured outside of the tourist areas in Aruba or Cancun take a trip to an Islamic nation and see what the consequences are for banning books and films, and what is involved in doing so.
Fsuck the U.N. It is doing us NO good anymore. We should just kick them out of NYC, send everyone home and just give up. What good does the UN do anymore…well other than WHO eradicating polio… they have done nothing….Oh and then smallpox, yeah, but other than that….
Since when are liberals for banning and censoring shit? Used to be the other way around, didn’t it? It used to be that the conservatives were made out to be the book-burning, freedom suppressors and the libs were the last bastion of creative freedom.
Lo, how the mighty have fallen.
Yeah that’ll fly over like a lead balloon
If given the chance they will probably control speech way better than anything else…
The proper response to this proposal is to tell them “FAQ U“.
And if they persist, the next step should be to “invite” the UN to move its HQ to its secondary location in Geneva – immediately.
That’s the main hope when we look at the proposed small-arms treaties they keep trying to force on us: now that our own “leaders” have rolled over and decided to play dead, at least we know that even if the damn things do get passed and accepted, that the UN will be totally ineffective in enforcement.
Islam and the United Nations can go to hell. “Dignity” is not a word I associate with either, BTW.
Well, as I sit to my dinner/breakfast (breanner?) of bacon and eggs, might I opine that anyone who is offended by my musings sans action against them or practicing their way of life can take a flying fuck at a rolling donut.
One fried in pig grease of course.
@ Adirondack Patriot –
No offense, but I’m not so sure I’d be willing to shoot the messenger on this one. The Washington Times story seemed like a mostly straight-up description of an Islamic coalition in the U.N. seeking to pass a wag-the-dog resolution. It had little to do with bi-partisan U.S. politics except when you drill way down into the constitutional level of separation of church and state. Something we might tend to take for granted, but can be an alien concept in other parts of the world.
Personally, I find there are two red flags sent up by the story likely to fly under the radar as the rhetorical blizzard builds:
The first is a matter of numbers. There are approximately one billion Muslims out of a total world population of eight billion. China and India also account for around one billion each. But U.N. votes in the General Assembly are not weighted by population; each sovereign country is given a single vote. This sets up a situation similar to the U.S. Senate where Rhode Island and California each have the same level of control.
The second issue is that the Islamic coalition seems to be adopting a posture similar to the rapist accused of jumping the chick in the red dress: We wouldn’t have killed your ambassador in Benghazi if you hadn’t provoked us by allowing Google to run that goofy trailer on YouTube.
Perry, when Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton encourage this sort of censorship by running an ad in Pakistan critical of any free speech that may offend Islam, then the Islamic movement and the Democrats’ merge into one.
“We call for legislation or a resolution to criminalize contempt of Islam as a religion and its prophet,”
Add “or Christianity or Judaism, Hinduism” to the end and see how fast those 57 countries all of a sudden have a change of heart.
The towel head, goat rapers can go rape themselves for all I care. They’re not human or a nation. They’re a rabble of animals that walk upright like monkeys, that’s it. Who gives a damn what they think or want. As soon as they start acting like humans then MAYBE they’ll earn some measure of credibility but never respect.
@13 Come on Yat. I don’t think you’re being open with us. Tell us how you REALLY feel. Oh and you said Rape twice. (I think he likes rape.)
/with regards to Mel Brooks
How come it’s okay for THEM to condemn attacks on THEIR religion, but OURS is ALL WRONG?
Someone got some serious ‘splaining to do.
Barack Obama, Bloviator in Chief, today proclaimed: “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”
You see, Chief, no matter what we do, they will always be outraged.
You can continue to appease them, but they will always find the next thing to be outraged about.
These people aren’t just about eliminating 14-minute YouTube videos, they destroyed ancient Buddhist statues in Bamiyan, Afghanistan in March 2001.
They will always find something that you must give up until you submit fully to Islam. It is their plan.
Yes, and they also invaded the nation of Mali and commandeered the city of Timbuktu, burned as many of the ancient manuscripts as they could, and broke open the End of the World tomb, which contained the souls/graves of 300 revered imams.
They are nothing but minions of hate and violence.
AP: You have earned honorary chairmanship of this thread.
Re 18. A motion has been made. Is there a second?
I’d second it, and I’d like to see the judicious use of appropriate munitions dropped from altitude…I would reduce everything in the countries represented to large piles of flaming rubble….let them know we were offended by them killing our ambassador so we over-reacted a little and killed most of them and destroyed their nations….oopsies…
Motion carries.
has anyone pointed out that our government had nothing to do with the video ? some douche (prolly a terrorost pot-stirrer just trying to unite the islamic world against us) made a video and it’s our government’s fault ? nah son. our govt may be impotent but they need a -by- on this one.
A couple of good links in reference to these demented rioters (I might actually agree with some TAH contributors on something):
http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/on-the-freedom-to-offend-an-imaginary-god
http://richarddawkins.net/news_articles/2012/9/20/a-word-to-rioting-muslims
@20 VOV,
Just dust off our nukes. Poof….You over there, you got a problem with that…poof…..anyone *else* want to talk shiat?!?! Poof.
Problem Solved, Problem STAYING Solved.
We WIN.
I would like to submit an alteration to the proposed motion. I would like to replace the words “large piles of flaming rubble” with the words “one giant glass parking lot”.
@ #6: Nah, just ‘off-shore’ them… about 100 miles… due east.
@25. All in favor. All opposed. Hearing no nays, the motion carries. It is so ordered. (By the way, we are using Robert’s Rules of Order–Robert Stack’s).
#20, 24, 25, 26,
Nice plan exept it would incinerate a bunch of women held hostage by the religion, and a bunch of little kids who don’t know islam from santa claus…… Oopsies!
Joe: Mikey is looking for you on another thread.
I wouldn’t nuke the desert pit these stone age rejects inhabit. Too much fallout in the air and I don’t need to be breathing them fumes. I nominate a mixture of napalm and Fuel-Air Bomb. For good measure, put in an effort to evac women and children first.
Guys, you do it this way.
You drop leaflets telling all the ‘men’ (any jihazit over 14) that they have to go to a specific spot and leave all women and children at home.
Meantime, you invite all the women to bring their children and have a big party for them.
The ‘men’ get to go to a single destination in the desert, where they disappear in a flash and a bang.
The women and children get to go shopping for new clothes, schoolbooks, shoes and toys, and start businesses of their own.
Okay, we have to form a subcommittee to sort through all the motions. Maybe tomorrow. Sine die.
Gonna go buy a quoran, grill up a pulled pork sandwich and eat it while I piss on aforementioned quoran. Shoot, might just video it and put it on youtube. Only regret will be that I won’t also be pissing on 10 dead taliban at the same time.
Ex-PH2
YES! The old: “you won tickets to the superbowl” trick…. nice nice nice.
Ex: I cross posted your reply to SOFREP.COM hope you don’t mind:
http://sofrep.com/11764/new-details-emerge-on-benghazi-attack/
This link is to Madonna’s bit of speech at a current concert in DC:
http://pheedo.msnbc.msn.com/click.phdo?i=d308b89b6a56e63a8837a211a10f7fbc
I have no comment.
@Tangonine, fine with me.