"History is philosophy teaching by example." (Lord Bolingbroke)

New Email Address:

Saturday, March 18, 2006

Muslims Take Cartoon Case to UN's "Allah" Commission

More on the attempt to make "defaming" Muhammed a universal crime.

The Islamic Faith Community, an umbrella organisation of 27 radical Muslim organisations in Denmark, is lodging a complaint against the state of Denmark with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Right (OHCHR) in Geneva (by the way, take a look at the Office's log with resembles the Arabic script for Allah). The reason for the complain is last Wednesday's refusal of the Danish director of public prosecutions to press criminal charges against Jyllands-Posten, the Danish newspaper that published 12 Muhammad cartoons in September 2005.

The Islamic Faith Community says that Denmark "acts as a barrier to justice" by its refusal to pursue the case against the paper. The Muslim organisation announced that it also plans to sue Jyllands-Posten for defamation in a Danish court.

Islam Faith Community spokesman Kasem Said Ahmad said that:

"Muslims living in the Islamic world have greater confidence in the United Nations than in the European Union."

Ahmad's statement tells much about the thinking of Danish Muslims.

1.Danish Muslims believe that although they constitute 5% or less of the total population, Denmark is "part of the Muslim world," or Ummah.

2. They believe that the laws of the United Nations should override the laws of Denmark and that Denmark should have no national sovereignty.

3. Muslims have no confidence in the European Union and apparently they do in the United Nations to settle a score in their favor.

4. Muslims believe that "defaming Mohammad" is an international crime and the perpetrators will be brought to justice by the United Nations.

Ahmad Akkari, the radical Danish imam who was caught lying and distributing bogus cartoons, accused Denmark of breaching UN human rights conventions.

He was caught in a blatant lie, and distributed false evidence to defame Denmark, has the temerity to accuse Denmark of violating "human and political rights" and demanding that Denmark be censured.

Our point is that in failing to censure Jyllands-Posten, Denmark has committed a breach of its duties a signatory of UN conventions on human and political rights as well as international agreements on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination.

What racial discrimination? Islam is not a race. Publication of cartoons is not a violation of human or political rights. A long-dead man can no longer be defamed, only that of his memory.

Mohammed was only a man, not God. His reputation was trashed in the Koran, in the Sura, the Hadiths, and in historical accounts of his contemporaries. What Muslims want to Mohammad is historical revision and a blind-and-sheepish acceptance by Muslims and non-Muslims alike of a white-washed version of Mohammad's life. They also want non-Muslims to overlook that Muslims yearly do commit thousands of violent acts in the name of Islam, invoking Allah and Mohammad as their inspiration.

The publication or non-publication of cartoons about Mohammad or about Muslims will obliterate neither historical memory or contemporary accounts of violence and discrimination AND DISRESPECT by Muslims against non-Muslims.

As Paul Belien explains in a recent article in The American Conservative

"Those who believe that the whole issue has to do with 12 cartoons are naïve. Denmark is being punished for its alleged Islamophobia. Its crime is not the publication of 12 drawings [...]. Its crime is the staunch refusal of the Danish Vikings to allow Muslim immigrants to impose their laws on their host country. [...]. Since Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen's center-right coalition came to power in 2001, Copenhagen has introduced the most sensible immigration policy in Europe.

Islamophobia is a disputed neologism "referring to fear and accompanying hostility towards the religion of Islam and its adherents, or by extension to predominately Muslim cultures, reflecting the influence of multiculturalism and identity politics.

What do we call the historical reverse behavior of Muslims toward non-Muslims? They certainly aren't "phobic,"or fearful of non-Muslims. We should create a descriptive term that summarizes the disdain of Muslims for non-Muslims, the willingness to discard their lives as beneath contempt, the belief that when dealing with non-Muslims, anything is acceptable. The term would have to be more forceful than xenophobia or bigotry, racism or feelings of superiority. Is there such a term? If not, one should be coined.

For the beginning with Mohammad, the imposition of the will of Muslims is behind all troubles involving Muslims and non-Muslims. For this reason, non-Muslims have learned to be wary of what Muslims say and do. Is that a "phobia" or commonsense and self-defense?


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home