U.S. co-sponsors anti-free speech resolution at the UN

[Mr.Fitnah]

U.S. co-sponsors anti-free speech resolution at the UN

Free speech death watch. The U.N. Human Rights Council approved the resolution, cosponsored by the U.S. and Egypt, yesterday.

It calls on states to condemn and criminalize "any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence." It also condemns "negative stereotyping of religions and racial groups," which is of course an oblique reference to accurate reporting about the jihad doctrine and Islamic supremacism -- which is always the focus of whining by the Organization of the Islamic Conference and other groups about negative "stereotyping" of Islam. They never say anything when people like Osama bin Laden and Khaled Sheikh Mohammed issue detailed Koranic expositions justifying violence and hatred; but when people like Geert Wilders and others report about such expositions, that's "negative stereotyping."

And the worst aspect of this and all such measures is that the "Incitement" and the "hatred" are in the eye of the beholder. The powerful can decide to silence the powerless by classifying their views as hate speech. The Founding Fathers tried to protect Americans from tyranny by protecting free speech. Now our free speech is threatened, and tyranny will take advantage of that. But we still have the First Amendment, right? Eugene Volokh, in an excellent analysis of the resolution, explains why it isn't that easy to dismiss this:

6. But why the fuss, some might ask, if we're protected by the First Amendment? First, if the U.S. backs a resolution that urges the suppression of some speech, presumably we are taking the view that all countries -- including the U.S. -- should adhere to this resolution. If we are constitutionally barred from adhering to it by our domestic constitution, then we're implicitly criticizing that constitution, and committing ourselves to do what we can to change it.
So to be consistent with our position here, the Administration would presumably have to take what steps it can to ensure that supposed "hate speech" that incites hostility will indeed be punished. It would presumably be committed to filing amicus briefs supporting changes in First Amendment law to allow such punishment, and in principle perhaps the appointment of Justices who would endorse such changes (or even the proposal of express constitutional amendments that would work such changes).​

U.S. co-sponsors anti-free speech resolution at the UN - Jihad Watch

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

I do believe Obamas justice department may try to bring our 1 st amendment under UN control .
This needs to be watched.

 

[garyd]

Another way to bring about the so-called fairness doctrine? Which by the way has nothing to do with fairness and everything to do with silencing political speech.

 

[Xenophon]

Barryland is the gift that just keeps on giving.

 

[brewerboy]

Wow.

 

[Sherry]

They can condemn away and wag their fingers in shame if it makes them feel good, but it's the "criminalization" aspect which is a load of crap.

 

[Lost Soul]

And the liberals cheer!

 

[noose4]

boy hitler sure was lucky that the above u.n. measure was not around back when he was aquiring power.


to conservatives this is a bad thing:

"any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence."

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

boy hitler sure was lucky that the above u.n. measure was not around back when he was aquiring power.


to conservatives this is a bad thing:

"any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence."

Yeah that could never be open to interpretation or misused.

 

[noose4]

boy hitler sure was lucky that the above u.n. measure was not around back when he was aquiring power.


to conservatives this is a bad thing:

"any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence."

Yeah that could never be open to interpretation or misused.

"incitement to violence" a terrible thing to outlaw, and this measure should have the anti israel nutjobs up in arms and not the anti islam nutjobs because this measure is obviously aimed at the likes of Ahmanijedad and other mid east leaders who put forth hate filled speech towards the jewish people and israel.

 

[asaratis]

U.S. co-sponsors anti-free speech resolution at the UN

Free speech death watch. The U.N. Human Rights Council approved the resolution, cosponsored by the U.S. and Egypt, yesterday.

It calls on states to condemn and criminalize "any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence." It also condemns "negative stereotyping of religions and racial groups," which is of course an oblique reference to accurate reporting about the jihad doctrine and Islamic supremacism -- which is always the focus of whining by the Organization of the Islamic Conference and other groups about negative "stereotyping" of Islam. They never say anything when people like Osama bin Laden and Khaled Sheikh Mohammed issue detailed Koranic expositions justifying violence and hatred; but when people like Geert Wilders and others report about such expositions, that's "negative stereotyping."

And the worst aspect of this and all such measures is that the "Incitement" and the "hatred" are in the eye of the beholder. The powerful can decide to silence the powerless by classifying their views as hate speech. The Founding Fathers tried to protect Americans from tyranny by protecting free speech. Now our free speech is threatened, and tyranny will take advantage of that. But we still have the First Amendment, right? Eugene Volokh, in an excellent analysis of the resolution, explains why it isn't that easy to dismiss this:

6. But why the fuss, some might ask, if we're protected by the First Amendment? First, if the U.S. backs a resolution that urges the suppression of some speech, presumably we are taking the view that all countries -- including the U.S. -- should adhere to this resolution. If we are constitutionally barred from adhering to it by our domestic constitution, then we're implicitly criticizing that constitution, and committing ourselves to do what we can to change it.
So to be consistent with our position here, the Administration would presumably have to take what steps it can to ensure that supposed "hate speech" that incites hostility will indeed be punished. It would presumably be committed to filing amicus briefs supporting changes in First Amendment law to allow such punishment, and in principle perhaps the appointment of Justices who would endorse such changes (or even the proposal of express constitutional amendments that would work such changes).​

U.S. co-sponsors anti-free speech resolution at the UN - Jihad Watch

It's about time it became illegal for those old mean, radical Muslims to say they intend to kill us all unless we bow to their god. Now we are safe. The UN and Barry's Civilian Police Force (the coming SS of the US) will protect us from hate speech and violence. We can now all lay down our arms.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

boy hitler sure was lucky that the above u.n. measure was not around back when he was aquiring power.


to conservatives this is a bad thing:

Yeah that could never be open to interpretation or misused.

"incitement to violence" a terrible thing to outlaw, and this measure should have the anti israel nutjobs up in arms and not the anti islam nutjobs because this measure is obviously aimed at the likes of Ahmanijedad and other mid east leaders who put forth hate filled speech towards the jewish people and israel.

No, to quash criticism of the Quran.
Criticizing Islam is against Islamic scripture.
No connection would be permitted between Islam the Quran and jihad.

 

[Shorebreak]

No surprises here. When GHW Bush gave his address to the UN in 2001 he proclaimed that the US would be instrumental in achieving the visions of the UN founders. That vision has yet to change. If you go to the un.org website and search for "Agenda 21" you'll find the most comprehensive piece of work that the UN is involved with. It's the complete harmonization of policies within every nation of the world so that all of them fall internally into a system that can easily and quickly be merged into a single sytem of regional world economies. It's not a secret. It's just been omitted by our lying media who don't disclose the activities, or how champions of the sytem have been appointed to leadership roles within our own government.

But in reality, this UN resolution is already a UN standard, only in a different format. If you look at the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which Bill Clinton claims to be the greatest document ever written (better than our Constitution), the second to last item states that "all of the above is true, unless it's contrary to the will of the UN". So under the UN, you actually have no gaurunteed rights. You may do what the UN allows, when they allowed it.

The United States is a co-signer of that document.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Sounds good to me.

I thought it would,

“What they call human rights is nothing but a collection of corrupt rules worked out by the Zionists to destroy all true religions.”
Ayatollah Khomeini

"Is the call for jihad against a particular people a religious right by those calling for it, or is it a human rights violation against the people on which jihad is declared and waged?"
John Garang

 

[Sunni Man]

UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Welcome to the United Nations: It's Your World


THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

1 All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

2 Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

3 Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

4 No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

5 No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

6 Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

7 All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of the Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

8 Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

9 No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

10 Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

11 1 Everyone charged with a penal offense has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defense.

2 No one shall be held guilty of any penal offense on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offense, under national or international law, at the time it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offense was committed.

12 No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honor and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

13 1 Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.

2 Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

14 1 Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.

2 This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

15 1 Everyone has the right to a nationality.

2 No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.


16 1 Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.

2 Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.

3 The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.


17 1 Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.

2 No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.


18 Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

19 Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression: this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

20 1 Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.

2 No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

21 1 Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.

2 Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.

3 The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

22 Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co- operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

23 1 Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favorable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.

2 Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.

3 Everyone who works has the right to just and favorable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.

4 Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

24 Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

25 1 Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

2 Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

26 1 Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.

2 Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.

3 Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

27 1 Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.

2 Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

28 Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.

29 1 Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.

2 In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.

3 These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

30 Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

“When we want to find out what is right and what is wrong we do not go the United Nations; we go to the Holy Koran . . .”
Ayatollah Moussave-Khomenehi

 

[Sunni Man]

“What they call human rights is nothing but a collection of corrupt rules worked out by the Zionists to destroy all true religions.”
Ayatollah Khomeini

I was not a fan of the Ayatollah, but on this issue he was correct.

 

[Sunni Man]

“When we want to find out what is right and what is wrong we do not go the United Nations; we go to the Holy Koran . . .”
Ayatollah Moussave-Khomenehi

As should all muslims.

The same as all Christians should consult the Bible for their moral guidance.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Seems a crucial point is dropped from the argument when appeasing muslims and mollycoddling jihad.
Who is the injured party?

Are muslims injured when they have to deal with resistance to a knife as it cuts through the sinew of the throat of a mushrikun whose only crime is disbelief ?

Are muslims injured when it the acts of murder, theft and terrorism are justified within the covers of the Quran and mirrored in the tradition of Islam?

Are muslims injured when the media uses figleafs like “Islamism” “radical Islam” and “terrorism” to hide fundamental Islamic tenants like jihad allowing more deaths being unexplained ?

Are muslims injured when no one questions how Islam defines “innocent” when muslims say “Islam forbids the killing of innocent people”?

Are muslims injured when they insist on special treatment backed by the unspoken threat of “terrorism” with the ultimate goal of replacing western legal traditions with sharia law as is required by the Quran .

Are muslims injured when we in the west are told muslims in America are integrated and we ignore and don’t take warning from what is happening in other countries where muslims were previously integrated and are now carving out separate no go communities from where raids, gang rapes murders are planned and launched from ?

Are muslims injured when free speech in barred because they are embarrassed by speech that points out the unmatched bigotry, hate instigated, and murder inciting text in the Quran and the unparallel history of human rights abuse perpetrated under the proper prosecution of Islamic imperial jihad in the name Islamic supremacy ?

Are muslims injured when judges rule that jihad in the name of Islam is a perversion of scripture with no evidence to support that claim and release persons into society who have expressed a malevolent desire to kill non muslims ?

Are muslims injured when media produce staged events where muslims are attacked on the street and in businesses by plants to show the viewers the wide spread islamophobia and the discrimination muslims face on a daily basis?

Are muslims injured when lays are enacted to bar speech that asks what’s the connection between jihad Islam and terrorism based on statement of those claiming scriptural inspiration ?

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Sa'id Raja'i-Khorassani, the Permanent Delegate to the United Nations from the Islamic Republic of Iran, declared, according to Amir Taheri, that "the very concept of human rights was 'a Judeo-Christian invention' and inadmissible in Islam. . .

. According to Ayatollah Khomeini, one of the Shah's 'most despicable sins' was the fact that Iran was one of the original group of nations that drafted and approved the Universal Declaration of Human Rights."