They're doing it, of course, under the cover of criminalizing "blasphemy," but the real agenda here is to compel the West to adopt Sharia norms forbidding criticism of Islam, including analysis of the jihad terrorists' motives and goals. This, of course, would leave us mute and defenseless before them.
AP thinks that the free nations of the West will oppose this. But with Barack Obama in the White House, that isn't actually certain. After all, he made sure that the U.S. not only supported, but cosponsored (with Egypt) a similar initiative at the United Nations not too long ago.
Unbelievable what obama is doing to the US and the free world.
OT:http://muslimsagainstsharia.blogspot.com/2009/11/new-york-premiere-of-inside-islam-what.html
I haven't seen much about this around but it explains your "pie jihad" and why Nonie was banned from speaking yesterday.
The sea of public opinion can be a cruel mistress.
http://www.metronews.ca/toronto/entertainment/article/367968--jon-and-i-don-t-deserve-bad-press-levi
Blasphemy is and always will be a victimless crime.
frankly imo. if Islam is the one true word of
god then Muslims would not have any need of blasphemy laws
s so i have to wounder just why they fear any critical comments on islam or could it be that their faith is that week that any critical comments might make some of the muslim sheeppleale lose faith??
So, what, when Muslims falsely state that Christians are Polytheists, will they agree to the same penalty they want for Christians who factually claim that Mohammed was a paedophile, misogynist, rapist, racist and imperialist warlord?
Hmm??
No?
Didn't think so.
Why is Islam afraid of criticism? "the wicked fly where no man pursueth"
A bit off topic: I was disappointed to hear speakers at a Lieberman run investigation on the hill into the Major Nidal Hasans massacre and actions on C-span this evening still trying to appeal to the so-called moderate Muslims.
Carl levin called for witnesses to condemn what Minister Pat Robertson said when he described Islam as a Political entity that was bent on taking over the world. Levin thought this was a disgusting statement by Robertson and insists that makes the problem worse. He demanded that the witnesses agree with his opinion and most unfortunately readily did.
Yep they still don't get it.
I want to see some one actually try to enforce this if BO signs on. My free speech is something I will fight for.
The UN . . . that's like getting the fox to watch the chickens.
President Obama will vote for something like that because he is a Muslim. He won't make a move in Afghanistan, pledged a multi-million-dollar fund to the Islamic nations (real nice), and continually gives speech to his Muslim friends. If he *actually* did leave Islam, he would be the greatest infidel of all! Of course he will vote for this measure.
This congress better get their heads out of their asses. The voters better wake up too.
The U.N. was going along with the criminalization of defamation of Islam until they got to the part about the penalty being pouring hot lead in their throats and beheading them :)
http://go.to/islamhistory
Algerian Ambassador Idriss Jazairy: ''If we keep hitting this glass wall and say there's nothing you can do about Islamophobia -- you can do something about anti-Semitism but Islamophobia is out of bounds -- you give an ideal platform for recruitment of suicide bombers.''
Threat noted.
I'm very tired of threats from these maggots. If Congress is agin' us, then we all owe it to ourselves and our families to get armed before they take away that right. I think a revolution to drive our treasonous "representatives" out of Washington, DC is on the horizon. I wouldn't be suprised if
half of Congress was on the take from some arab country. Politicians sold out Europe and they're trying to do it to us. Will we sit around and talk while they're doing this to us, or make a few threats ourselves?
"Threat noted."
EXACTLY. That's what we always get from these "moderate, reasonable" representatives of the Muslim world. They try to phrase it innocently, but they're actually just playing "good cop, bad cop" with us on a civilizational scale. And as we all know, the good cop and the bad cop are working for the same goal.
tanstaafl,
Why are Muslims so afraid of criticism? They have thin skin over emptiness.
I once knew a Catholic priest, my mother's brother, who was like some Muslims. Dare to question the coherency of his doctrines and a temper tantrum might erupt or he might sneer about the alleged pride of unbelievers or something like these. I can still hear him snorting "it's just pride" from his deathbed. He was referring to secular leftists and Protestants at the time.
Nevertheless, usually he could keep his cool around others, whether other family members, people in his parish, etc. Yet if you knew the right questions and timed them right, he'd overreact with a hissy fit. His pious brother, a lawyer active in Serra (not Sierra), is very similar, i.e. petulant. Both of their sisters, too, as was their pious yet difficult mother.
Anyhow, there's no need for alarm. Even if the Muhammadans get their blasphemy laws, there will always be an opening for counterattack via thoughtful, well-timed questions that help them to expose their childishness. For example, "if Allah is so omnipotent that it can do anything it pleases, then why is it impossible for Allah to arrange the 114 chapters of the Koran in an infinite number different of ways?".
"Muhammadan, is Allah really not so omnipotent after all, as Aquinas asserted of Jesus long ago?"
The answer is that there are correct ways to reason about quantity, numbers, and sets, and this truth informs the discovery of axioms and of theorems derived from axioms to calculate the finite number of ways that 114 chapters could be ordered. Allah can't make it otherwise. Unfortunately for Allah (or is it just 'Gabriel'?), it doesn't follow from the calculation that Allah is empowered to do the arranging. To show that will require a different proof.
Oh, The Amazing Qur'an.
"Muhammadan, why didn't Allah dispense knowledge about mathematics in a 115th chapter? Is it because he wasn't in a big hurry to spread Islam everywhere as it might have in just 100 years had Allah added a looooooong chapter with explanations of axiomatic mathematics plus explanations of theoretical and empirical physics? That might have necessitated yet another long chapter about engineering (to apply the knowledge to machines, to shipbuilding, to telecommunications technology, etc.), and ANOTHER chapter about navigating the oceans of the world, another chapter about correct reasoning (to better interpret and use all this info), another chapter about accounting and enterprise management (since you need to keep track of the assets employed by the global caliphate and to manage those assets efficiently), another chapter about how money arises on a free market (so that you don't do something foolish like establish a central bank or fiat currency, either of which would make your caliphate unstable), and so on."
"Muhammadan, your god (or is it just 'Gabriel'?), could have added another chapter, still, with the argument showing that (1) materialism is false and that (2) the question 'is materialism true?' is not at all the same as 'does Allah exist?'. But Allah didn't do that, either, now did it? Is Allah even aware of the distinction?"
Maybe a problem with Allah is that it's not so omniscient, either.
Anyhow, the thin skin of Muhammadans always remains vulnerable, even in a very dark world where there are only the knaves and the dupes and the connivers of Islam. There, too, at the endstate of Islam, Muhammadans should be rounded up like you should any wild, undisciplined clique of gangsters who refuse to let live you peacefully and knowledgably.
I would like to add a few words in defense of less deranged priests. (The Catholic priest, my uncle, was deranged, too...like the caricature you can find on the web.) It so happens that his family has all its roots in the west and southwest of Ireland. Now, what has been the dominant doctrine of immaterialism there for more than 1000 years?
wHY DONT WE FIGHT BACK BY SUING THE ENTIRE NATION OF iSLAM, THE ummah. sINCE ALL OF THEM ARE ONE THAT MEANS THEY ARE all RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT THE RADICALS AND THE MODERATES DO.
sUE THEM ALL.
Muslim countries trying again to criminalize criticism of Islam at the UN
They're doing it, of course, under the cover of criminalizing "blasphemy"
...........................
Who else is clamoring for this? Not Christians, or Jews, or Hindus, or Buddhists, or Zoroastrians, or Wiccans, or Bahai (many of these faiths do not even have a concept of "blasphemy").
No, no one but Muslims are pushing for this actions—and no one but Muslims will benefit from it. Certainly, no one in Dar-al-Harb will, as it will ease the way for Muslim supremacy and the implementation of Shari'ah—which is the entire purpose.
Any way to quelch the truth is to start with what allows it, freedom of speech. If the truth is too "offensive" for people to handle, then we must pass a law to ban it. Much like what the democrats want to do to the conservatives or anybody who does not agree with them and pass the fairness doctrine which would quelch any criticism of them, but then again these are the same people who say they are for our constitutional rights. The same democrats who give more rights to islamic terrorsts than to unborn children.
The same democrats who consider an unborn child not human, but confessed terrorists who behead, slam planes into buildings, bomb buses, and trains are human.
The UN had cowered to Iran, why not the peaceful muslim nations who commit honor killings, persecute christians and other non-muslims, brutalize their women, strap bombs to their children, and firebomb cars and commit murder while protesting the muhammed cartoons, (which I found funny), instead of speaking out against them, but then again they would not be following their religion correctly.
Islam is not compatible with democracy and never will be, but these same islamists who are calling for a law against blasphemy of Islam, are the same people who use our freedoms and democracy to file grievances if they get pulled off planes for suspicious activity, blantantly call for the death of Americans and Jews right here in our own country in their mosques, and have textbooks that call Christians and Jews apes and pigs. But have no problem calling people who are critical of Islam and tell the truth, racists or Islamaphobes.
The do not like the truth, so they will find a way to suppress it. Much like in a Communist nation. This would be a slap in the face to the free loving world. But in Eurabia, where shariah courts are operating, polygamous marriages are allowed, and where muslims get their "freedom of speech" to call for the downfall of Europe they have sold their freedoms for tolerance and multiculturalism.
There is so much corruption in the UN that it would make the Watergate scandel look like routine business meetings.
Robert Spencer said in his opening statements that AP thinks that the free nations of the West will oppose this. But with Barack Obama in the White House, that isn't actually certain. After all, he made sure that the U.S. not only supported, but cosponsored (with Egypt) a similar initiative at the United Nations not too long ago.
The leader of the most powerful nation in the free world(perhaps for a little bit longer), cosponsored this bill with none other than a muslim nation. The same man who is supposed to uphold the constiution of the United States, has already bowed to the Saudi King, went to Tukey and apologized for America's actions in the muslim world, (even though what is going on in the muslim world has been going on even before America was founded or had a foreign policy) and the same guy who says we need to be more tolerant of Islam and that Islam is part of America. He broke his oath and should have been tried for treason.
Obama is like a Neville Chamberlain who thought we could negotiate with Hitler, but he was wrong. Winston Churchill knew the threat of Hitler and the Third Reich, just like Reagan who would not negotiate with the Islamic terrorists. Obama seems to think that the very same men who took down our towers, bomb buses, trains, murder innocent people everyday, calls for our deaths everyday, and use women and children as shields we can negotiate with. Obama seems to think that the very same religion that condones this we should accept because it is part of America.
Al-qeada and their cohorts are wanting to destroy America, well they better hurry because Obama is beating them to it.
Question: Will America follow the same path as Eurabia? If we keep skiing down the slope of political correctness, we will.
Question: Will the UN bow down to the muslim countries? It is possible. The same UN that allowed 17 resolutions against Saddam Hussain and did nothing, the same UN that allows Iran to keep enriching uranium to build a nuclear bomb, and the same UN who allowed for the Lybian leader Ghadaffi to use his "freedom of speech" that his religion repels, to speak at the UN in New York. Who by the way, gave a warm welcome to the return of the Lockerby bomber of Pan Am flight 103 which killed 176 Americans. He had terminal cancer, we must have compassion, but let us not forget that he had no compassion for the savage murder of those passengers and crew on that flight.
The truth hurts, but it is still the truth.
gravenimage, I think you're right. Imagine how easy it would be for muslims to implement islamic law anywhere if nobody could protest.
According to muslim rationale, if people resist the spread of islam they are attacking islam, giving muslims the right to wage jihad to defend islam. When muslims attack or prey upon non-muslims and the non-muslims attempt to defend themselves, the non-muslims are declared the attackers and enemies of islam, their wealth is seized, and they are killed. The muslim ethos defies logic as we understand it because in their twisted minds, only islam is important.
There is no conceivable way that muslims and non-muslims can indefinitely co-exist in harmony anywhere in the world, even in OUR WORLD. It is simply impossible. If this ridiculous proposal is enshrined in law, muslims would be free to impose sharia anywhere. That would be catastrophic and would lead to world-wide civil wars. Islam is a scourge, worse than any plague or pandemic mankind has ever suffered.