Western powers, often driven by political correctness, bend over backwards to speak in generalities about fighting "intolerance," "stereotyping," and "discrimination" in order to appear principled and even-handed, even at the expense of acknowledging specific, pervasive cases of all of the above. The EU's document of "stuttering timidity" in response to the violent persecution of Christians in the Muslim world is one such example.
For its part, the Organization Formerly Known as the Organization of the Islamic Conference has long spoken in vague generalities and platitudes about such principles with the expectation that uninformed listeners will project their own understanding of the concepts of "tolerance," "justice," and "fairness" onto the discourse. Thankfully, others in the West have seen through this tactic, blocking the OIC's quest for a "legally binding institutional instrument" with which to prosecute speech deemed offensive to Islam, and blocking resolutions against "religious defamation" at the UN. The language is vague, but the purpose is specific.
This time, Hillary Clinton and the EU have fallen for the OIC's game, in an update on this story. "OIC, West pledge to combat intolerance," from Arab News, July 17 (thanks to Chris):
ISTANBUL: In what can rightly be described as a seminal step in relations between the Muslim world and the Western world, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and the leading nations of the Western world led by the United States and the European Union agreed Saturday to take concrete steps to combat intolerance, negative stereotyping and discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence against persons based on religion or belief.
The high-level meeting was held at the historic Yildiz Palace in Istanbul. It was attended by EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs Cathrine Ashton along with foreign ministers and officials from France, Germany, Britain, Italy, Japan, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Poland, Romania, Denmark, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Pakistan, Senegal, Sudan, the Vatican, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Arab League and African Union. The meeting was co-chaired by OIC Secretary-General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Ever since he took office, the OIC secretary-general has been working on formulating ways and means to stop acts of religious intolerance.
“It was during my address to the 15th session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva that I outlined a new approach toward evolving a consensus against incitement to violence and intolerance on religious grounds that could endanger peaceful coexistence and must be viewed as a direct contrast to the very notion of a globalized world,” said Ihsanoglu. “I am glad that the eight points in the proposed approach found resonance with all the negotiating partners. They formed the basis of the consensus reflected in Human Rights Council Resolution 16/18. The importance of the consensual adoption of this resolution should be duly recognized.”
He said challenges remain.
“However, the test would lie in the implementation. Having been successful at consensus building, we must now act in concert to build on the consensus. The adoption of the resolution does not mark the end of the road. It rather signifies a beginning based on a new approach to deal with the whole set of interrelated issues,” said Ihsanoglu. “Resolution 16/18 provides a good basis for concerted action by states, at both national and international levels and must be utilized accordingly. Otherwise, we would be faced with the unaffordable risk of the agenda being hijacked and set by radicals and non-state actors.”
Ihsanoglu said there was a delicate balance between freedom of expression and incendiary speech.
This recalls his declaration that there are "red lines" which speech must not cross.
“We continue to be particularly disturbed by attitudes of certain individuals or groups exploiting the freedom of expression to incite hatred by demonizing purposefully the religions and their followers. Though we respect their freedom of opinion and expression, we find these attitudes politically and ethically incorrect and insensitive.”
At the meeting, Clinton discussed how to build on a UN Human Rights Council resolution passed on March 24 that calls for promoting tolerance and respect for diversity of beliefs, without restricting legitimate free speech.
Clinton agreed to pursue a new religious tolerance agreement, which respects free expression of religious beliefs in order to resolve debates over religion between the West and the Islamic world.
“Together we have begun to overcome the false divide that pits religious sensitivities against freedom of religion,” Clinton said. “We are pursuing a new approach based on concrete steps to fight intolerance wherever it occurs.”....
The Christians in Eqypt, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Indonesia, and elsewhere in the Muslim world are waiting. Asia Bibi is waiting, Madam Secretary. As are Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Ahmadis, Baha'i, atheists, agnostics, and ex-Muslims.
“Together we have begun to overcome the false divide that pits religious sensitivities against freedom of religion...
And exactly what false divide is that Imam Clinton? And once you identify it, how do you intend to overcome it?
How do you overcome religious supremacy? How do you overcome 'religious sensitivities'? What is your suggestion for making the intolerable tolerable? There is actually no such thing as freedom of religion, no country has it, certainly not Islam...So Hillary is full of blue smoke and mirrors...
I think it amusing that this blond kuffar woman is lecturing to a bunch of Mahoundian male supremacists...Allah does have a sense of humor...
Why are there no Organization of Christian/Buddhist/Hindu Conference and so on! This is so evil -letting the Org. of Islamic Conf (OIC) to dominate the UN and the world! Hillary and Catherine Ashton (a Leftie, an EU foreign policy chief, who is a UK Socialist-Labour politician and First-Vice-President of the EC), not only are betraying persecuted non-Muslims, especially in savage Islamic-ruled countries, but are also betraying persecuted women/girls, including of Muslim women/girls, who want to be free from such savage SLAVERY of Islam!
I'm sure that Canada, Britain, France, Denmark, et al have a lot to learn from places like Sudan on how to deal with religious minorities. Maybe they should send some of their police and army units there to observe, and then apply the lessons learned back home.
Great idea, Let’s make the first red line be the prohibition of hate speech against people of the Jewish religion. Along with that the calls for the destruction of Israel would also be examples of religious intolerance.
Run that up the flagpole and see how many Muslims salute.
The high-level meeting was held at the historic Yildiz Palace in Istanbul.
That makes it sound like a glorious edifice was chosen specially for a special occasion, but what it neglects to tell you is that the OIC has it's Istanbul offices in the Yildiz Palace. In other words this was a schmooze at the OIC's Istanbul offices; not an important summit on neutral ground, but a parley to arrange the terms and conditions of Western surrender. The OIC called and the glory seekers of free-world came arunning; they just can't resist a good shindig in the glittering palaces of power, even when it's to chart out their own demise.
Ever since he took office, the OIC secretary-general has been working on formulating ways and means to stop acts of religious intolerance.
Well he could by cleaning up his own house, and demand that Islam discards the Dhimma of Omar and expunges the anti-Kafir verses from the Koran.
Oh, I forgot, We should have an Org of Jewish Cooperation in the UN too! That would really rattle the OIC!
Hillary should just resign and take up residence in Istanbul where she can educate herself in the mysteries of the veil. Who knows, a tight fitting niquab might renew Bill's interest. Naw, probably not. Not even a niquab and a cigar.
Run that up the flagpole, indeed. And put a time limit on it. How much time do we even have to wait?
We should all begin to feel a little Jewish if we have our heads in the game.
Now would you be so foolish as to let the fox into the hen house? Of course you wouldn't because you have some knowledge and maybe experience that Foxes' love chickens.
To bad Pillary Clinton is not as smart as the girl in "Little red riding hood"
Clearly these politicians are being charmed by the Fox and the Wolf in Grandmas clothes because they are literally clueless about what drives the Islamic Supremacist ideology. They simply refuse to read Islams imperatives towards the infidels that are locked in stone for all time. Yes nothing is changed and nothing will when it comes to Islamic determinations against Western societies.
The OIC is trying to oppress freedom of expression everywhere they can and our so-called leaders are the dhimmi enablers for their cause at the expense of our freedoms. Islamic Countries will never do the same, they will never show tolerance towards the West. They are in fact destroying churches and killing Christians and non Muslims every day.
When you listen to our ignorant and clueless dhimmi leaders like Pillary Clinton you feel like you are watching another Neville Chamberlain moment being played out again.
When did our culture go so wrong that we now consider "tolerance" to be unequivocally good, and "hate" to be always bad? It's just intellectual laziness and error, and the triumph in our age of emotion and sentiment over reason. Surely, if we examine these words logically, we come to the conclusion (as did our wiser forefathers) that it's proper and good to hate some things and be intolerant of some things. Should people be patting themselves on the back for being "tolerant" of oppresion, cruelty, suffering and injustice? Didn't Wilberforce and MLK jr HATE slavery and racial prejudice? Isn't it right to HATE and be INTOLERANT of oppressive totalitarianism? I'm sure that in the 1930s, many of these upstanding liberals of today would have been very TOLERANT of Nazism.
GK Chesterton saw this process already happening when he wrote "Orthodoxy" in 1908. He saw that as Christianity was shattered as a cohesive force in the West, not only would it let loose the vices that had previously been supressed, but it would also let loose the Christian virtues, which would be pursued to warped, insane ends since they were now disconnected from the whole message of Christianity. So where Christ forbade us from hating other humans, now the modern world wants to forbid us from hating any belief systems. Christ taught us to be tolerant of our fellow man, but the modern world wants us to be tolerant of every ideology, no matter how oppressive and evil.
Hillary Clinton joined foreign ministers from 20 other countries, several regional organizations, and even the Vatican in endorsing the UN Human Rights Council Resolution 16/18. The U.S. would have been noteworthy if they had refused to endorse Resolution 16/18. This resolution is NOT about "religious defamation," but rather incitement of discrimination or violence against individuals. Since both the Quran and Sharia Law include calls for jihad against non-Muslims, this resolution will be much more difficult for Islamic nations to fully implement than it will be for the U.S. Most of the Islamic countries that endoresed the resolution have laws and policies that disicriminate against Jews and Christians. Jihad Watch readers should read the entire resolution, which includes the following statement: " . . the open public debate of ideas, as well as interfaith and intercultural dialogue, at the local, national and international levels can be among the best protections against religious intolerance and can play a positive role in strengthening democracy and combating religious hatred, and . . that a continuing dialogue on these issues can help overcome existing misperceptions."
As Rebecca Bynum wrote in her book, "Allah is Dead -- Why Islam is Not a Religion," "Islam is deeply and profoundly wrong. Pretending it is right only worsens our situation by delaying actions that must be taken of our own civilization, however imperfect and unseemly it may be, is to be preserved." I say, let the open public debates of ideas begin.
“Together we have begun to overcome the false divide that pits religious sensitivities against freedom of religion,” Clinton said. “We are pursuing a new approach based on concrete steps to fight intolerance wherever it occurs.”
Mainstream media 'newspeak' decoded:
These are valuable terminology guides to help readers cut through the fog of mainstream media reporting, the likes of world acclaimed BBC, ABC, NBC, etc., stretching all the way to Al-Jazeera and the NY Times. They're all in bed on this. So reader beware. Stay well informed. Remove media 'blinders' at your own risk, or it may be labeled 'hate speech' and 'incitement to violence'... all theirs.
Boston Tea Party:
Excellent Points; were we wrong to hate Nazism?
Should we have tolerated Nazism as long as we did?
Were we wrong to hate Imperialist Japan?
Should we have tolerated Imperialist Japan as long as we did?
Still even 9-11, 7-7,khobar towers,USS Cole,attacks on 5 African embassies,first attack on WTC,Pan Am Flight 103,Mumbai Massacres,attack on train in Spain and so many more seem not to put a dent in minds that we are indeed at war with Islam.
Oh the moderate Muslim, is he going to save the day? I think not; whose driving the Islamic ship? Look at Iran, the behaviour of Pakistan, and even Afghanistan-- are they really are friends?
To long we have made the serious of mistake of giving Islam a pass because we foolishly define it as just a religion. How wrong we are of course. Islam is a totalitarian ideology that most experts recognize as being up to 85 percent political.
IMO for anyone who is involved in this meeting and agrees to OIC demands for blasphemy laws should be considered traitors to their countries Constitutional principles and should be tried for Treason against the Constitution.
This is but a first step toward the tyranny of Islamic organizations against freedom loving people all over the world.
Implementation and execution of these OIC demands will mean shipping people like us off to "re-education camps", prison or mass graves. It's coming soon.
One way view this Islamic rage at dissent is by analogy to the power of a secular judge to find someone in contempt of court. Except that judges are confined to ruling on the conduct of people within their courtroom, not anywhere in the world.
Totalitarian megalomaniac Islamic legislators/judges necessarily find contempt all around them, anywhere and everywhere they try to assert jurisdiction and control and demand complete obedience.
The very phrase "live and let live" must itself be viewed as an offense to Islam and to the living proponents of domination by these Islamic slave traders.
If Islamic and Prick are synonymous can we be anti-Prick and not violate the notions of comity?
Being anti-Prick is a good thing, right? (What is it then that the OIC-Pricks are calling everyone, if not pricks?)
Watch this very carefully. If it gains teeth in the West we are done. It could be the beginning of the end.....We must get Sheikh Obama out of the white house because he is the source of this affliction.
After reading this article too things come to my mind
1)Clinton is coming very close to saying that free speech should come with restrictions.
2) Christians around the world who are persecuted by Islamic countries and the Vatican signs on to a document written by Muslims to prevent any speech they think is offensive? Being Catholic I will not give another dime to the church.
Dear Hillary--a white American Leftist from a well-off family who, like all others in her demographic, believes that the chief end of all people, which they all recognize themselves, is to be a white American Suburbanite (oh, yes, and if you're ancestry's from somewhere where climate favors darker skins, you get to be an honorary white). She so readily assumes that civility, mutual respect, letting people go about their legitimate business, sympathy for the underdog, and leaving dealing with the troublemakers to the police are "universal human values" self-evident to all and sundry. But she also has the oh-so-subtle undertow in her thinking that nobody out there has a history until the great and wonderful "We" get involved. And she also thinks that only white Americans have anything to feel guilty about.
Hence, Hillary Clinton sees the Islamic world through the prism of the American Civil Rights Movement of her youth, with Muslims in the role of global African-Americans. Hence she is oh-so-certain that as soon as the gentlemen of the OIC are assured of Obama's and Clinton's sterling intentions, they will cheerfully sign on to making the world safe for abortion on demand, same sex marriage, and acceptance of adolescent rebellion in all of its manifestations.
When will the USA have a real SecState?
With this latest bold news from the offices of Hillary (Yale Law), Mark Steyn better watch his back and Herman Cain better watch his mouth.
"...the leading nations of the Western world led by the United States and the European Union agreed Saturday to take concrete steps to combat intolerance, negative stereotyping and discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence against persons based on religion or belief."
Wonderful news! Finally, we're gonna confront Islam head on for its "intolerance, negative stereotyping and discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence against persons based on religion or belief..."!
Oh wait... You mean that's not the intent???
Gulp.