Showing posts with label incitement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label incitement. Show all posts

Thursday, November 14, 2013

Speaking Out Against Intolerance

Speaking Out Against Intolerance A/C.3/68/L.48 Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping,stigmatization, discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against persons, based on religion or belief continues by calling all states to take actions based on remarks by OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu addressed to the HRC before their vote on one of the previous resolutions. Eight points were outlined in the speech, and included in the current draft.
Calls upon all States to take the following actions, as called for by the
Secretary-General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, to foster a domestic
environment of religious tolerance, peace and respect by

(e) Speaking out against intolerance, including advocacy of religious hatred
that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence;

speaking out

    This suggestion from the OIC was included in HRC Res 16/18 and implemented in September of  '12 by Obamination's bitching about The Innocence of Muslims, which they falsely blamed for the  Benghazi  Attack.  Obamination condemned the video without contesting the validity of its conceptual content, which has been verified from authentic sources.

intolerance

    The intolerance displayed in the video comes from Moe: his intolerance of Christianity, Judaism & Pagans. The video itself is not intolerant.

advocacy

    The video does not advocate violence against persons or property. Moe advocated and engaged in violence, which the video accurately portrays.

religious hatred

    The video accurately portrays Islamic religious hatred, it does not advocate hatred.

incitement

    The video accurately portrays Moe preaching military conquest, it exposes incitement without engaging in it.  The rioting resulted from rabble rousing kutbah in mosques during Jumah Salat, not from the video. Christians who viewed the video were not incited to violence by it.

violence

    The violence realistically depicted in the video emanates from the damnable doctrines of Islam enshrined in the Qur'an and exemplified in the sunnah.   The riots blamed on the video came from mosques, not from churches.  The video does not suggest that anyone should engage om vop;emce. the Qur'an commands it, Moe exemplified it and the Imams preach it.

Wednesday, November 13, 2013

Condemning Advocacy Of Religious Hatred That Incites Violence

condemning advocacy of religious hatred that incites violence A/C.3/68/L.48 Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping,stigmatization, discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against persons, based on religion or belief continues by condemning advocacy of religious hatred that incites violence.
Condemns any advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to
discrimination, hostility or violence, whether it involves the use of print,
audiovisual or electronic media or any other means;

    The condemnation is highly abstract and so broad as to be devoid of meaning. Precisely what are they bitching about?  The United nations bitch about any and every criticism and exposure of the damnable doctrines & practices of Islam. Secretary General Ban Ki Moon has an example for you, please pay close attention. 

Reuters quotes U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon about Fitna:"There is no justification for or hate speech incitement to violence," Ban said in a statement. "The right of free expression is not at stake here."
Please watch the video, carefully noting the source of each and every incidence of hate speech and incitement. 

The following quotes and links provide ample documentation for the validity of the video's conceptual content.

Each of the above listed ayat is linked to ten parallel translations.

The text of the violent ayat in the list above: [Links to Ibn Kathir's Tafsir supplied when available.]

  • 2:191 And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith. [Abdullah Yusuf Ali]
  • 3:139-141 So do not become weak (against your enemy), nor be sad, and you will be superior (in victory) if you are indeed (true) believers. If a wound hath touched you, be sure a similar wound hath touched the others. Such days (of varying fortunes) We give to men and men by turns: that God may know those that believe, and that He may take to Himself from your ranks Martyr-witnesses (to Truth). And God loveth not those that do wrong.  And that Allah may test (or purify) the believers (from sins) and destroy the disbelievers. [Hilali &Khan]
  • 4:91 Ye will find others who seek to gain your confidence as well as that of their own people: So oft as they return to sedition, they shall be overthrown in it: But if they leave you not, nor propose terms or peace to you nor withhold their hands, then seize them, and slay them, wherever ye find them. Over these have we given you undoubted power.[Rodwell]
  • 8:39  And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allah) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allah Alone [in the whole of the world]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allah), then certainly, Allah is All-Seer of what they do.[Hilali & Khan]
  • 9:29  Make war upon such of those to whom the Scriptures have been given as believe not in God, or in the last day, and who forbid not that which God and His Apostle have forbidden, and who profess not the profession of the truth, until they pay tribute out of hand, and they be humbled.[Rodwell]
  • 47:4 When ye encounter the infidels, strike off their heads till ye have made a great slaughter among them, and of the rest make fast the fetters. And afterwards let there either be free dismissals or ransomings, till the war hath laid down its burdens. Thus do. Were such the pleasure of God, he could himself take vengeance upon them: but He would rather prove the one of you by the other. And whoso fight for the cause of God, their works he will not suffer to miscarry;[Rodwell]

Riyad us-Salaheen, Book 11, Ch. 234 cites  many ahadith in proving the obligation of Jihad. It does not mention the above cited ayat, but does cite several others.  Reliance of the Traveler specifically offers 9:29 as justification for declaring war on Jews and Christians.

The Reliance of the Traveller. BOOK O: JUSTICE >> Chapter O-9.0: Jihad

O-9.8: The Objectives of Jihad
The caliph (o-25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o-11.4) -which is the significance of their paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions) (O: and the war continues) until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the word of Allah Most High,
"Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and His messenger have forbidden-who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book-until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled" (Koran 9.29)


Note the use of fitna in 8:39 as casus belli. It is also mentioned in 5:33 Muslims love to cite 5:32, but never quote its successor to Kuffar. Why is that?

5:32  Because of that We ordained for the Children of Israel that if anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or (and) to spread mischief in the land - it would be as if he killed all mankind, and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all mankind. And indeed, there came to them Our Messengers with clear proofs, evidences, and signs, even then after that many of them continued to exceed the limits (e.g. by doing oppression unjustly and exceeding beyond the limits set by Allah by committing the major sins) in the land!
5:33 The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter.

Ibn Kathir's tafsir of  5:33 has a blood curdling implication. Note the emphasized phrases.

`Wage war' mentioned here means, oppose and contradict, and it includes disbelief, blocking roads and spreading fear in the fairways. Mischief in the land refers to various types of evil.

Mere disbelief in Allah is sufficient to subject you to the hudud listed in the ayeh above cited! Now you rightly understand that Geert Wilders is not exaggerating in his video presentation.

    Without exception, the hate speech and incitement displayed in Fitna flow from Islam's canonical texts and the mouths of rabble rousing Imams, not from Geert Wilders.  The Secretary General does not condemn Allah, his Book, his Messenger or his rabble rousing preachers, he condemns the video which exposes them.

    Fitna is neither hate speech nor incitement, it is objective and factual; an exposure of the damnable doctrines of Islam and accursed practices which flow from belief in  them.

    The sentence quoted from the draft resolution is a lie: the UN does not condemn "any advocacy of religious hatred", instead, they condemn and seek the criminalization of any exposure of it, including this blog post.

Saturday, November 19, 2011

Defamation of Religions vs Negative Stereotyping: SCIRF Gets It Wrong

 Leonard Leo, chairman of the board of SCIRF, testified before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, and Human Rights  on the International Religious Freedom Report. There is a move underway to defund SCIRF, presumably because its mission conflicts with Obamination's Islamophilia.

    While I sympathize with the SCIRF and believe that it should be preserved, I take issue with Leo's position on the resolution passed by the HRC last March and currently before the 3rd Committee prior to a General Assembly vote in December.

    I do not contest the fact that SCIRF was instrumental in steering the resolutions in a new direction, I take issue with the assertion that the  resolution has been substantially improved and its negative impact on freedom of belief & expression substantially reduced.  Only the rhetoric has improved, the meaning, intent and effect are not improved.

Defamation of Religion in the United Nations -- Intolerance Resolution Takes the Place of Defamation Resolution: Over the past decade, resolutions in the UN General Assembly and UN Human Rights Council on the so-called defamation of religions sought to establish a global blasphemy law.  USCIRF’s engagement with the State Department, the U.S. Congress and specific UN member states helped bring about a notable decrease in support for these resolutions over the past three years.  It is an example of the catalytic and coordinating role that the Commission has played.

  Since 2008, the resolutions were supported by only a plurality of member states.  Due to this loss of support, the UN Human Rights Council in March 2011 adopted, in place of the divisive “combating defamation of religions” resolution, a consensus resolution on “combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization of, and discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence against persons based on religion or belief.”  The resolution properly focuses on protecting individuals from discrimination or violence, instead of protecting religions from criticism.  The new resolution protects the adherents of all religions or beliefs, instead of focusing on one religion.  Unlike the defamation of religions resolution, the new consensus resolution does not call for legal restrictions on peaceful expression, but rather, for positive measures, such as education and awareness-building, to address intolerance, discrimination, and violence based on religion or belief.

intolerance

    I can not and will never tolerate the practice & propagation of a doctrine which mandates that we be killed or subjugated, our property seized and our widows raped and our orphans sold into slavery.  By God, I stand on the rights seized by the founders, which they enshrined in the Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights.  I will not accept demands that I tolerate the intolerable.  I will not abide by laws, national or international, demanding silence in the face of approaching evil.

stereotyping

    Allah commands Muslims to wage war against us in 8:39 & 9:29. Those imperatives are confirmed by Moe's Sunnah in Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387 and other hadith. They are codified in Shari'ah: Reliance of the Traveller O9.8-9.9. Allah promises Muslims admission to his celestial bordello if they wage war and threatens them with eternal damnation if they shirk.  Allah gives extra credit for a better seat in his bordello if they take any step to injure or enrage us.

    So most Muslims "don't do that / don't believe that". Oh, don't they? Islam is not cafeteria Catholicism, as made clear by 2:85: "Then do you believe in a part of the Scripture and reject the rest? Then what is the recompense of those who do so among you, except disgrace in the life of this world, and on the Day of Resurrection they shall be consigned to the most grievous torment. ".

    If Muslims "don't do that", then how did the Hindu, Assyrian & Armenian genocides happen?  How do you explain shouts of Takbir in the school at Beslan and the aircraft over New York City? 

    Which Muslim is a believer who fights in Allah's cause, killing and being killed [9:111] and which is a hypocrite whose Islam "will not exceed their throats." [Sahih Bukhari 5.59.638]?

protects individuals

    Who is going to go to Egypt and protect the Copts and their homes, businesses & churches?  Will you send the Marines to Kenya & Nigeria to protect Christians there?  Who will protect Christians in Pakistan?  You and whose army, 24/7/365? 

    You do not protect individuals by passing resolutions, you protect them with "boots on the ground".  You can only protect indigenous Christian minorities by eliminating the Muslims who murder them with impunity. 

    The cartoonists did not assault or kill any Muslims; they did not destroy any property. Muslims, stirred up by rabble rousing Imams at Jumah Salat did that. Exactly how do those resolutions protect Muslims? 

    Islam is not defamed by revelation of the fatal facts linked in previous paragraphs. Muslims are not threatened or stereotyped by revealing those facts. Silencing criticism of Islam would not protect Islam from defamation, neither would it protect Muslims; it would only remove our ability to warn our fellow citizens of approaching danger. 

education

    The malignant & malicious practice of al-Taqiyya & kitman is not education, it is indoctrination.  Islam is not a religion, neither is it peaceful nor is it great. Islam is intra-species predation.  Education will happen if intelligent and rational people read the Qur'an, hadith & Shari'ah.  What currently happens in our educational & religious institutions is indoctrination.

concrete details

    I have prepared two tables comparing the defamation & stereotyping memes. The tables are complemented by relevant quotes from the Secretaries General of the OIC and UN, followed by evidence to further clarify the issue. Bold, blue, underlined text is hyperlinked to source documents.

defamation
stereotyping
Muhammad had coitus with a nine year old girl.
Muhammad had coitus with a nine year old girl.
God would never select an unrepentant sinner as his final prophet.
Muslims tend toward pedophilia because Muhammad is their role model.


Regardless of which standard of conduct is adopted, stating the fact revealed by Aisha, that she was nine years old when Moe consummated their marriage, will be criminalized and condemned. 

defamation stereotyping no religion should be equated with terrorism
I will cast terror

to strike terror

Allah cast
terror

You are more awful as a fear


victorious with terror

I will cast terror

to strike terror

Allah cast
terror

You are more awful as a fear


victorious with terro

I will cast terror

to strike terror

Allah cast
terror

You are more awful as a fear


victorious with terro

Islamic doctrines incite terrorism.
Muslims are terrorists because they emulate Moe.
Islam =
terrorism.


    No  matter how you slice it; whichever protocol  they follow, truthful statements about Islam must be outlawed and condemned.  Defamation || negative stereotyping is a distinction without a difference.

concrete examples

    In this quote from a speech to the OIC, Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu implies that  Geert Wilders' Fitna and the Danish Cartoons incite religious hatred & violence.

It is clearly established that international law and in particular the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) of 1966 forbids any incitement to religious hatred. Article 20 of this Covenant stipulates that “Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.” Despite this clear stipulation, the Attorney General of Denmark failed to see in the infamous Danish Cartoons issues on Prophet Mohamed, any incitement to hatred on bases of religion or belief. The same authority in the Netherlands did the same thing in the case of the film Fitna, produced by a Member of Dutch Parliament. Such negative or indifferent attitudes adopted by officials in certain Western countries which seem to condone acts of an Islamophobic nature, can only lead to legitimizing Islamophobia and enhancing discrimination against Muslims and exposing their well-being and safety to danger. [Speech 0f His Excellency Prof. Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, Secretary General 0f the Organisation 0f the Islamic conference, at Columbia University 21/09/2008]

    Ban Ki-moon also condemned Fitna.
Reuters quotes U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon about Fitna:"There is no justification for hate speech or incitement to violence," Ban said in a statement. "The right of free expression is not at stake here."

incitement ? 

Fitna

 Fitna juxtaposes violent Qur'an verses and hadith with the rabid hate speech & incitement of several Imams and the resulting terrorism & riots. Fitna does not incite, it exposes incitement.

Motoons

    The Motoons depict Moe as a terrorist.  They are humorous; they do not exhort or incite Kuffar to assault Muslims. Moe died before the invention of gun powder, but he was a terrorist by his own admission, having declared that he was "made victorious with terror". He deliberately built a reputation for egregious barbarian rapine so as to terrify his intended victims, rendering them disorganized and effectively defenseless.

Quran burning

    Pastor Terry Jones planned to hold a Qur'an burning 09/11/10. He chickened out, but in March of '11, he held a four hour mock trial of the Qur'an with Arabic speaking experts on both sides of the debate and, having found the Qur'an guilty of inciting violence, burned it. 

    Muslims in Pakistan, on exiting from Jumah Salat, rioted, resulting in several deaths and considerable property damage. Pastor Jones did not incite violence, the Pakistani Imams incited violence in their rabid rants at Friday prayer services.

Ihsanoglu's jaundiced view


The publication of offensive cartoons of the Prophet six years ago that sparked outrage across the Muslim world, the publicity around the film Fitna and the more recent Qur’an burnings represent incidents of incitement to hatred that fuel an atmosphere of dangerous mutual suspicion. Freedom of expression has to be exercised with responsibility. At the same time, violent reactions to provocations are also irresponsible and uncivilised and we condemn them unequivocally.[http://71.18.253.18/en/topic_details.asp?tID=239]

We have to be sure about what constitutes criticism but not incitement to hatred. For example, when somebody calls for burning of our holy book Qur`an, can it be considered as mere criticism? [http://71.18.253.18/en/topic_details.asp?tID=39]

The most recent and unfortunate in the series of such events was the announcement
pertaining to Bum a Koran Day. It was highly provocative towards the religious sentiments
of Muslims everywhere in the world and must be condemned in the strongest possible terms.
[Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu's speech to the HRC Session 15.]


legal foundation

    Moe ordered the murder of his critics; an example to be emulated.
Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4436:

It has been narrated on the authority of Jabir that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Who will kill Ka'b b. Ashraf? He has maligned Allah, the Exalted, and His Messenger. Muhammad b. Maslama said: Messenger of Allah, do you wish that I should kill him? He said: Yes. He said: Permit me to talk (to him in the way I deem fit). He said: Talk (as you like). So, Muhammad b. Maslama came to Ka'b and talked to him, referred to the old friendship between them and said: This man (i. e. the Holy Prophet) has made up his mind to collect charity (from us) and this has put us to a great hardship. When be heard this, Ka'b said: By God, you will be put to more trouble by him. Muhammad b. Maslama said: No doubt, now we have become his followers and we do not like to forsake him until we see what turn his affairs will take. I want that you should give me a loan. He said: What will you mortgage? He said: What do you want? He said: Pledge me your women. He said: You are the most handsome of the Arabs; should we pledge our women to you? He said: Pledge me your children. He said: The son of one of us may abuse us saying that he was pledged for two wasqs of dates, but we can pledge you (cur) weapons. He said: All right. Then Muhammad b. Maslama promised that he would come to him with Harith, Abu 'Abs b. Jabr and Abbad b. Bishr. So they came and called upon him at night. He came down to them. Sufyan says that all the narrators except 'Amr have stated that his wife said: I hear a voice which sounds like the voice of murder. He said: It is only Muhammad b. Maslama and his foster-brother, Abu Na'ila. When a gentleman is called at night even it to be pierced with a spear, he should respond to the call. Muhammad said to his companions: As he comes down, I will extend my hands towards his head and when I hold him fast, you should do your job. So when he came down and he was holding his cloak under his arm, they said to him: We sense from you a very fine smell. He said: Yes, I have with me a mistress who is the most scented of the women of Arabia. He said: Allow me to smell (the scent on your head). He said: Yes, you may smell. So he caught it and smelt. Then he said: Allow me to do so (once again). He then held his head fast and said to his companions: Do your job. And they killed him.

Shari'ah

    Reliance of the Traveller, O11.10  lists five acts which break the treaty of protection exposing a Dhimmi to execution. This is the fifth item in that list: "or mentions something impermissible about Allah, the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), or Islam."  What is impermissible to mention? O8.7 contains a list of 20 items including: "to revile Allah or His messenger ", "to deny the existence of Allah, His beginingless eternality, His endless eternality, or to deny any of His attributes which the consensus of Muslims ascribes to Him ", "to be sarcastic about Allah's name, His command, His interdiction, His promise, or His threat",  "to deny any verse of the Koran ", and "to revile the religion of Islam".

    In reality, the OIC seeks, through the UN, to impose Islamic blasphemy law on us, denying our right to warn our fellow citizens of the existential threat Islam poses to our lives, liberties & prosperity.   We were not stupid enough to outlaw criticism of Communism during the cold war, why should we outlaw criticism of Islam?

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Geert Wilders Trial: Truth is No Defense

Google published an article from Canada Free Press about recent developments in the trial of Geert Wilders.  One prosecutorial qoute  stands out like sore thumb and must be addressed.  Thanks and a tip of the hat to Jihad Watch.


"You can expect a politician to be aware of the impact of his words and in any case, the legal limit may not be crossed, no matter how important it may be to address supposed problems and to contribute to matters of general interest,"   Prosecutor Birgit van Roessel [Emphasis added.]

    The relevant statutory provisions are revealed in the summons.  Expressions which "insult a group of people"  and/or " incites hatred or discrimination" against them are arbitrarily prohibited.  No defenses are allowed.  

    If Muslims, motivated by the normative doctrines of Islam enshrined in the Qur'an and exemplified by Muhammad's Sunnah, murder film makers, assault homosexuals, threaten members of parliament and pose an existential threat to the cultural identity and continuance of a free & democratic Netherlands, public disclosure of the facts is prohibited and can not be excused on grounds of necessity.  

    Besides mandating national suicide, the prosecutor has a severe cognitive dissonance problem. She moved for dismissal of charges of insulting Muslims because the insult was to Islamic ideology, not to Muslims.  If the insult was to Islam, then the incitement &  discrimination must also be against Islam,  not Muslims.  All of the charges should be dropped, they should never have been filed.  


Tuesday, October 5, 2010

Geert Wilders Trial: Refresher Course

The purpose of this blog post is to remind readers of the background information essential to comprehending the resumption of the trial of Geert Wilders.

    This quote is from an English translation of the summons which lists the accusations against  Geert Wilders.  The summons is 24 pages long, detailing many statements.


The aforementioned summoned person is charged with the fact that
1.
he, on one or more dates in or about the period from 8 August 2007 up to and including 27 March 2008, in The Hague and/or Amsterdam and/or (elsewhere in) the Netherlands, on multiple occasions, at least once, (each time) in public, orally, in writing or through images, intentionally offended a group of people, i.e. Muslims, based on their religion, by (each time) intentionally in
- De Volkskrant and/or
- on the internet on the website www.liveleak.com (in the film Fitna)
placing (having placed) and/or showing (having showed) and/or having heard one or more texts and/or images and/or footage and/or audio fragments with the following content:
(De Volkskrant of 8 August 2007, ‘Enough is enough: prohibit the Quran’)
„A moderate Islam does not exist. It does not exist because there is no distinction between Good Islam and Bad Islam. There is Islam and that is it. And Islam means the Quran and nothing but the Quran. And the Quran is the Mein Kampf of a religion that intends to eliminate others and that refers to those others – non-Muslims – as unfaithful dogs, inferior beings. Read the Quran, this Mein Kampf, again. In whatever version, you will see that all the evil that the sons of Allah commit to us and themselves originates from this book (Oriana Fallaci, The Force of Reason, post-script, page 305, February 2006).‟...

2.
he, on one or more dates in or about the period from 7 October 2006 up to and including 27 March 2008, in The Hague and/or Amsterdam and/or (elsewhere in) the Netherlands, on multiple occasions, at least once, (each time) in public, orally, in writing or through images, incited to hatred of people, i.e. Muslims, based on their religion, by (each time) in
- De Volkskrant and/or
- De Pers and/or
- Dagblad De Limburger-Limburgs Dagblad and/or
on the internet
- on the website www.geenstijl.nl and/or www.pvv.nl and/or
- on the website of Radio Nederland Wereldomroep and/or the Wereldomroep and/or
- on the website www.liveleak.com (in the film Fitna)

 [Emphasis added.]

    Notice the prominent mention of Fitna, the publication of which is the basic issue, condemned by many government leaders, the OIC, and the Secretary General of the United Nations.  The summons goes on to describe the images in the video and list statements made therein.

    The first charge is intentionally offending Muslims.  The statute, cited on the last page of the summons,  makes the issue cut and dried.

Article 137c Dutch Penal Code
  • o 1. He who publicly, verbally or in writing or image, deliberately expresses himself in an way insulting of a group of people because of their race, their religion or belief, or their hetero- or homosexual nature or their physical, mental, or intellectual disabilities, will be punished with a prison sentence of at the most one year or a fine of third category.
  • o 2. If the offence is committed by a person who makes it his profession or habit, or by two or more people in association, a prison sentence of at the most two years or a fine of fourth category will be imposed.

 Article 137d Dutch Penal Code
  • o 1. He who publicly, verbally or in writing or in an image, incites hatred against or discrimination of people or violent behaviour against person or property of people because of their race, their religion or belief, their gender or hetero- or homosexual nature or their physical, mental, or intellectual disabilities, will be punished with a prison sentence of at the most one year or a fine of third category.
  • o 2. If the offence is committed by a person who makes it his profession or habit, or by two or more people in association, a prison sentence of at the most two years or a fine of fourth category will be imposed.

    Truth is not a defense in the statute.  How shall the defendant establish proof of his intent?  The law, as written, criminalizes truthful speech on the grounds of perceived insult & inciting hatred, discrimination or violence.

    Geert Wilders is an elected member of the Dutch Parliament, in that position, he is entitled to discuss public policy.  Islamization is a legitimate subject for public discourse; it is taking place in Europe.

    Fitna can be viewed in its entirety by clicking this link. It is divided into two parts on Youtube.  I will embed the two parts here so that you can view them.
You will see a few verses from the Qur'an  and an English translation .  You will hear an Arabic recitation and see graphic depictions of the practical application of the verses. 


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37w-aXGk8M0


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwwsnAr3rY8

Reuters quotes U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon about Fitna:
“There is no justification for hate speech or incitement to violence,” Ban said in a statement. “The right of free expression is not at stake here.”
    Who expressed hatred in that video?  Who incited violence in that video?    The Qur'an, not Geert Wilders  is the source of hate and incitement.  Wilders exposed hate & incitement, he did not perform it.

    My earlier blog posts relevant to the trial are linked in the list below.

Monday, September 27, 2010

International Burn a Qur'an Day: Fan the Embers!

The pr campaign initiated by Pastor Terry Jones, though it ended in a fizzle, afforded us an opportunity to expose the  evil contents of that abominable book. In Washington D.C., at the White House,  two courageous men revealed the contents and crumpled pages from a translation.  In New York, near the site of the proposed Ground Zero mosque, one brave man burned pages torn from a translation.

    Islam  has nothing to kvetch about because:

  1. Pastor Jones abandoned the burning ceremony.
  2. The crumpled Qur'an was a translation, not Arabic.
  3. The burned Qur'an was a translation, not Arabic. 
Muslims do not consider translations to be sacred.  The Qur'an's magic is in the sound; it is meant to be memorized and recited, not read.

    Yet Muslims are bitching like a nervous little dog tied up outside, cold, hungry & lonely:   barking incessantly. Their barking is both a threat to our liberty and an opportunity to expose Islam's damnable doctrines.  We must repulse the threat and exploit the opportunity.

threat:

    On September 22, 2010, Pakistan's delegate to the United Nations Human Rights Council submitted a draft resolution condemning International Burn a Qur'an Day.  The draft is a single page packed with feces, some old and stale, some fresh and pungent. [Emphasis added to quotes for clarity.]

stale feces

    The preamble contains  abusive  perversion  by reference to the U.N. Charter,  the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, ICERD & ICCPR.  It continues with a disingenuous call for one sided inter-cultural  dialogue.  It extends its spew of feces by  conflating criticism of Islam with racism by reference to the United Nations Millennium Declaration.  It aggravates the offense by conflating criticism with physical violence.

  •     Reaffirming the pledge made by all States under the Charter of the United Nations to
    promote and encourage universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental
    freedoms for all, without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion,
    Human rights belong to individual humans, not to groups, associations or institutions.  There is no right to be shielded by coercive force from all questioning and criticism.
  • Reaffirming also that all human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and  interrelated,
    This is exemplary kitman, the Islamic art & science of deception by obfuscation.  They are equating a non-existent & unstated right to be  shielded from criticism with our right of free expression.  The reaffirmation is boiler plate taken from previous Defamation of Religions resolutions.  The implicit false premise: "our right to be shielded from criticism  negates your right of free expression; you can't say anything about our demon, profit, doctrines or practices".
  • Reaffirming further that discrimination between human beings on the grounds of
     religion or belief constitutes an affront to human dignity and a disavowal of the principles of
    the Charter of the United Nations, and shall be condemned as a violation of the human rights
    and fundamental freedoms proclaimed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and
    enunciated in detail in the International Covenants on Human Rights, and as an obstacle to
    friendly and peaceful relations between nations,
    Pastor Jones proposed to burn an unholy book.  That is not an act of discrimination, it is a condemnation of a set of evil doctrines & practices. Condemning & incineration of the demon's manifesto of predation is not discrimination, nor does it pose an obstacle to peaceful international relations.  All of the threats and violence came from the other side, who burned flags & Bibles, destroyed property and killed people in their riots;  none came from the Dove World Outreach Center. 
  • Welcoming also the resolve expressed in the United Nations Millennium Declaration,
     adopted by the General Assembly in its resolution 55/2 on 8 September 2000, to take
    measures to eliminate the increasing acts of racism and xenophobia in many societies and to
    promote greater harmony and tolerance in all societies, and looking forward to its effective implementation at all levels, [Emphasis added.]
    The preliminary document for the recent Durban Conference contains  the key to the emphasized expression. Pay close attention to this, which constitutes a demonic distortion of the English language. I added the bold red font to make the evil  clause stand out.

4.  Emphasizes the urgent need to address the scourges of anti-Semitism, Christianophobia, and Islamophobia as contemporary forms of racism as well as racial and violent movements based on racism and discriminatory ideas directed at African, Arab, Christian, Jewish, Muslim and other communities;

The U.N. has equated opposition to Islam with racism.  Islam is not a race. Arab is a race; Islam, invented by an Arab,  enslaves Arabs, Africans, Asians & Europeans.  If we condemn Islam's sanctification  of mandatory genocidal conquest through terrorism, we are automatically branded as racist.   The intent is to silence us; to shut down debate arbitrarily.

fresh feces

    The novel crap is contained in a five point enumerated list of action items.

    Noting with deep concern the instances of intolerance, discrimination, profiling and
acts of violence against Muslims occurring in many parts of the world,

  1. Condemns in this regard the recent call by an extremist group to organize a ‘Burn a Koran Day’; 
  2. Condemns also any advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to I hatred, discrimination, hostility or violence; 
  3. Calls upon the international community to stand united against such events which undermine peaceful coexistence between nations and create an environment  conducive to violence; reprisal
  4. Calls upon also all States to condemn and oppose, in accordance with their obligations, under international human rights law, any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to hatred, discrimination, hostility  and violence;  
  5. Urges the international community to support all international and regional initiatives to promote cross-cultural and interfaith harmony.

extremist group

    Extremist connotes violent tendencies.  In common parlance, the Muslims who slaughter innocents in the name of Allah are labeled "extremists".  Who has Pastor Jones and his Dove World Outreach Center threatened?  Who have they assaulted?  Who have they killed?  They condemned and expressed an intention to burn the book which inspires & motivates terrorists.  What is extreme about that?

    This term of opprobrium, delivered in the absence of definition and evidence, constitutes  libel and slander.  Pakistan's delegate ought to be sued for libel and so should the UNHRC  when it passes that resolution.

incitement

    Exactly what did Pastor Jones say that incited anyone to hate Muslims?  Exactly what did he say that incited anyone to assault Muslims?  Precisely who acted on that incitement?  Did he brandish a sword and shout "Crusade, Crusade, Crusade! ?

undermine peaceful coexistence

    Did Pastor Jones call for war?  Did his congregation march upon  Pakistan's embassy hurling snones and firebombs?  Who  rioted?  Who incited them to riot?  Did they listen to the Pastor's sermon or their Imam's Kutbah at Juma Salat?

condemn and oppose

    President Obama, Secretary of State Clinton & General Petraeus  condemned and opposed  International Burn a Qur'an Day. They met their obligations. What more  do you demand?  Note the repetition of boiler plate from an earlier point.  What is its source?

ICCPR

Article 20

  1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.
  2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.
The United Nations
INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON
CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS

That just happens to be an international human rights covenant, legally binding on and enforceable against signatories.

opportunity

    The enemy has pointed out our best weapon against it!  We have an opportunity to pick up and deploy that weapon.

demand enforcement of Art. 20!

  1.  Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.
What institution violates that provision in its immutable constitution?  I have a clue for you: Pastor Jones proposed to burn it.

2:216. Jihâd (holy fighting in Allâh's Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allâh knows but you do not know.

8:39
. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allâh), then certainly, Allâh is All-Seer of what they do.

9:29. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

9:38. O you who believe! What is the matter with you, that when you are asked to march forth in the Cause of Allâh (i.e. Jihâd) you cling heavily to the earth? Are you pleased with the life of this world rather than the Hereafter? But little is the enjoyment of the life of this world as compared with the Hereafter.

9:39. If you march not forth, He will punish you with a painful torment and will replace you by another people, and you cannot harm Him at all, and Allâh is Able to do all things.

9:123. O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allâh is with those who are the Al-Muttaqûn (the pious - see V.2:2

61:10. O You who believe! Shall I guide you to a commerce that will save you from a painful torment.

61:11.  That you believe in Allâh and His Messenger (Muhammad ), and that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allâh with your wealth and your lives, that will be better for you, if you but know!

61:12. (If you do so) He will forgive you your sins, and admit you into Gardens under which rivers flow, and pleasant dwelling in Gardens of 'Adn ­ Eternity ['Adn (Edn) Paradise], that is indeed the great success.


    If that ain't propaganda for war, what the Hell is?      ICCPR 20.1 requires that it be proscribed by law.  Who will enforce 20.1?

  1. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.
1:6. Guide us to the Straight Way 

1:7. The Way of those on whom You have bestowed Your Grace, not (the way) of those who earned Your Anger (such as the Jews), nor of those who went astray (such as the Christians). 

2:161. Verily, those who disbelieve, and die while they are disbelievers, it is they on whom is the Curse of Allâh and of the angels and of mankind, combined.

98:6. Verily, those who disbelieve (in the religion of Islâm, the Qur'ân and Prophet Muhammad ()) from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and Al-Mushrikûn will abide in the Fire of Hell. They are the worst of creatures.

98:7. Verily, those who believe [in the Oneness of Allâh, and in His Messenger Muhammad ()) including all obligations ordered by Islâm] and do righteous good deeds, they are the best of creatures.

Reliance of the Traveller, o.11.5 lists discriminations against non-Muslim subjects.
-2- are distinguished from Muslims in dress, wearing a wide cloth belt (zunnar); 
-3- are not greeted with "as-Salamu 'alaykum";
-4- must keep to the side of the street;
-5- may not build higher than or as high as the Muslims' buildings, though if they acquire a tall house, it is not razed;
-6- are forbidden to openly display wine or pork, (A: to ring church bells or display crosses,) recite the Torah or Evangel aloud, or make public display of their funerals and feastdays;
-7- and are forbidden to build new churches.

    If the cited ayat ain't incitement to & the cited Shari'an ain't discrimination against Jews & Christians,  what the Hell is?  ICCPR  20.2 requires that it be proscribed by law.l  Who will enforce 20.2?

    It is expected that the draft resolution condemning International  Burn a Qur'an Day will be debated and voted on this week.  It is certain that it will pass because the OIC and its allies have a majority of seats in the HRC.   This gives us a brief moment of opportunity. Let us seize it!!

International Qur'an Petition

    The petition linked immediately above cites the relevant provisions of ICCPR, ICERD & CPPCG and the Islamic doctrines which violate them.  It prays to the World Court for enforcement of those provisions which require civilized signatories to outlaw Islam.

    The link is to an html formatted copy which contains links to source texts. At the end of the text, it contains a signature link. I  urge you to  copy the petition, paste it into an email and send it to everyone you can hope to influence with an exhortation to sign and forward it.  Signing and promoting this petition is the best hope we have of prevailing over an existential foe which seeks to silence our protest against its intention to enslave us.

     U.N. resolutions are not binding, they lack the force of law.  ICERD can be enforced. At the end of November, the Ad Hoc Committee for the Elaboration of Complementary Standards will meet to write the resolutions into ICERD.  You can kiss the First Amendment goodbye, because it will be passed, signed and ratified.

    Our only hope of retaining our liberty  rests in raising the cost of this attack above the price Islam is willing to pay.  We must link full exposure of the Qur'an's evil contents to their attack against our free expression right.  We must do it now, while it is still legally possible.

    Act now if you love liberty and want to preserve it for yourself and your progeny.  Sign and propagate the International Qur'an Petition. Copy and cross post this blog post.  Seize the opportunity, it may be our last.

Sunday, April 4, 2010

Islamic Extortion Letter to Obama

On March 30, 2010, Logan's Warning published an article exposing Revolution Muslim's latest assault against our way of life. The article included this video.
[If the embed code does not work, click this link to watch it on YouTube.]



The eleven minute video includes several insane rants that should outrage every loyal American. It also includes a reading of the open letter described below.

Revolution Muslim has uttered and published an open letter, in the form of a petition, which threatens the United States of America in general and its President in particular with violent attack.

The petition opens with an arrogant self-identification and barbarian threat emulating the form and style of Islam's damnable Profit.
In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Most Merciful1 - This letter is from the Muslim Nation (ummah), the followers of the Last and Final Prophet to mankind, Muhammad son of Abdullah2 (May Peace and Blessings be Upon him), to Barack Obama, the ruler of the United States of America - May Peace be upon those who follow the right path and true guidance.3

  1. They claim to speak for Allah, who allegedly had one final spokesman: Moe, who, thank God,was silenced by death in 632.
  2. They claim to speak for Ummah al-Islamiyya, which has no Caliph since the dissolution of the Caliphate by Attaturk, and therefore has no one to speak for it.
  3. The last sentence of the opening paragraph is a thinly veiled threat. If peace is upon the followers of true guidance (the Qur'an) then by default, war is upon those who reject the Qur'an.
The second paragraph makes the dawa explicit and restates the implicit threat.
We invite you to Islam4 and want to inform you that if you become a Muslim you will be safe5 and Allah will double your reward,6 but if you reject this invitation to Islam you will be committing a sin by misguiding your subjects and admirers and Allah will humiliate you for warring against His (elevated above all is He) intimate trustees.
  1. This is the explicit dawa; President Obama has been invited to publicly embrace Islam and make it the national religion, in contravention of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution.
  2. This is a restatement of the implicit threat, safety and war being the alternative outcomes dependent on the choice of Islam or kufr.
  3. This clause is an emulation of Moe's extortion letters. Compare it to this sentence from his letter to Heracles: "... Allah shall reward you doubly...".
The third paragraph quotes the Qur'an 3:64, which demands that we deny Jesus Christ. Read the context or Ibn Kathir's Tafsir to verify this fact.

In the fourth paragraph, the authors criticize President Obama's campaign tactics and the perceived results of his first year in office. While calling him a tyrant, they accuse the United states of having an empire.

In their screed's fifth paragraph, the authors quote Thomas Paine before waxing irrational and inverting fact and logic while bitterly bitching about our and Israel's retaliation against Islamic aggression.

In their sixth paragraph, the authors continue to fulminate irrationally about our foreign policy and denounce our efforts to suppress Islamic terrorism. Their seventh paragraph segues into domestic policy while maintaining the same level of irrationality. The irrational fulminations are followed by an enumerated list of demands that we surrender in Afghanistan & Iraq, shut down our military bases, end our support of Israel and disassociate from the Islamic regimes they seek to overthrow and replace with pure theocracy.

The screed concludes with a dense summation which requires detailed dissection.
If you do this than there will be peace between us and you7. Allah says in the Quran, “and if the enemy inclines toward peace, then you incline to it and put your trust in Allah (8:61).”8 We call you to peace Mr. Obama, we only want to live under the laws and culture that God has granted us in the Qur’an, free from American dictate, free from empire and colonialism9. In the event you establish these policies then over $1 trillion will be available to spend on your own people.10 They can have food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, education and more. The American Empire is going bankrupt and all because of its War on Islam.11 We tell you the Muslim nation has never suffered under occupation for long and that our true creed does not allow us to practice our religion but hand over soveverignty in the realm of politics, economics and society to a foreign force. Islam dominates in every aspect of the word and is never dominated.12 It is a superior system as it is Divine and from the Creator Himself. We call you to the religion that is the only acceptable way of life in the eyes of Allah and we warn you of a personal and societal humiliation in the event that you obstinately persist and do not heed this call13.
  1. This is a repetition of the threat: if we do not accede to their demands, they will make war on us.
  2. The quote of 8:61 is out of context. 8:60 commands Muslims to build the largest army they can to "strike terror into the hearts of the enemies" [Abdullah Yusuf Ali].
  3. They declare that they want to live by the Qur'an, free from American dictate, empire & colonialism. America does not dictate domestic policies in Arabia, nor do we have an empire nor colonies. It is Islam that seeks empire and colonies. If they want to live under Shari'ah, what are they doing in New York City? They should be in Mecca.
  4. If we abandon our national defense, nothing will be available for domestic spending, because we will be conquered. Besides which, the dichotomy is false on its face. National defense is a necessity for the preservation of food, clothing, shelter and every other good and service. Those goods and services are created by private enterprise, not by the federal government.
  5. We do not have a war on Islam, Islam is at war against us; our government is blind to the fatal fact. This state of denial must come to an end, and soon if we wish to preserve our liberty and prosperity.
  6. Islam dominates! Our elected leaders seem to be ignorant of Islamic supremacism. 9:33 tells us that Allah sent Moe to make Islam superior. The concept is repeated in 48:28 and confirmed in Sahih Bukhari 4.52.65 with these words: "He who fights that Allah's Word (i.e. Islam) should be superior, fights in Allah's Cause."
  7. The demand for surrender and threat of attack is repeated one last time.
The petition has 340 signatures.

The demon spawn rallied on a New York sidewalk, promoting their open letter to Obama, cursing him, cursing democracy; inciting hatred and violence. If the content and style of this video don't outrage you, you need psychiatric care.
[If the embeded code does not work, click this link to watch the video on YouTube.]



What are you going to do about it? While those demon spawn were cursing America, our way of life and our President, a new resolution "Combating Defamation of Religions", complaining of incitement of hatred and violence, was fresh off the presses, with the ink still wet. What will you do about it? Will you roll over and go back to sleep or will you rise up in protest?

It is time for those America haters who threaten us with violent attack to go home. The citizenship of those who were born here should be revoked and they should be shipped out with one way tickets. The Mosques, Madrassas & Islamic Centers should be closed for good. The enemies of America should be removed and kept out.

We can't do it, because Islam wears the false cloak of religion. Because it is assumed to be a religion, it is under the protection of the First Amendment's Free Exercise clause. We must amend the Constitution to acknowledge the fact that Islam is a war cult, not a legitimate religion. The first step in that long process is to sign and promote the Outlaw Islam! petition. After signing the petition, copy it and paste it into an email to everyone you can influence. Urge them to sign and forward it.

At the end of November, the Ad Hoc Committee will meet for the purpose of writing a protocol to ICERD which will make this blog post and all negative information about Islam illegal. There is only one defense, a counter attack. We must take Islam to the World Court for its egregious violations of ICERD, ICCPR & CPPCG. Those international human rights covenants, if enforced, require that Islam be proscribed by law for supremacism, incitement & genocide. If you love liberty, particularly free speech, then you will sign and promote the International Qur'an Petition. If you won't take this simple step to preserve free speech, who will? If you won't do it now, it will soon be too late. Now is the time to sign these petitions and send them to your family, friends, associates and acquaintances with an exhortation to sign and forward the petitions.