There is a big problem with a reference contained in a Moroccan resolution over Qur’an burning that was adopted by the United Nations:
The resolution strongly condemns all acts of violence perpetrated against individuals based on their religion or beliefs and the desecration of sacred texts, stressing that such behavior violates international law.
Invoking the term “international law” has become a favorite tactic of Islamic supremacists. They resort to this frequently when referencing Israel’s retaliation against jihadists. What they mean by “international law” is Islamic laws and sentiments. The problem with the wording and meaning of the Moroccan resolution is that no violence is perpetrated against any human being in Qur’an burnings. So the question presents itself: is this remark an intentional deception to exaggerate the action of Qur’an desecration. or is the Qur’an itself in the view of Muslims regarded as an individual? Given the facts about minority persecution and the absence of vigorous condemnation of such persecution by Organization of Islamic Cooperation member nations, it would appear that the Qur’an itself is placed far above human life in value. Therefore, burning a Qur’an is presented as if it were an act of violence against an individual, which is, of course, a concept that is foreign to secular societies.
The West places human life above any inanimate object. On the other hand, the only international law and human rights code recognized by OIC nations is Sharia law, and the Islamic view of human rights that is in accordance with it. The OIC is no longer functioning under the UN Declaration of Human Rights; since 1990, the body has functioned officially under the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights, which is based on the Sharia. The member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation affirm:
…the civilizing and historical role of the Islamic Ummah which God [Allah] made the best nation that has given mankind a universal and well-balanced civilization in which harmony is established between this life and the hereafter and knowledge is combined with faith; and the role that this Ummah should play to guide a humanity confused by competing trends and ideologies and to provide solutions to the chronic problems of this materialistic civilization.
This document declares the supremacy of the Islamic ummah over the entire world. The Qur’an burnings increasingly expose why there is no compatibility between Western laws and those who ascribe to the Sharia. The challenge now is that the Islamic world is being increasingly exposed in its overt efforts to subjugate the West. Up until now, these efforts were stealthy, using deception and intimidation via the “Islamophobia” subterfuge, championed by the OIC, and now accepted by the UN. And on a more practical level, Islamic countries have been buying out UN agencies.
America remains the highest (dhimmi-paying) contributor to the United Nations, contributing a fifth of the its budget at over 12 billion dollars.
It is time for America to withdraw from the UN or support a new one, consistent with democratic nations that ascribe to the original UN Declaration of Human Rights.
“UN Adopts Morocco-Presented Resolution Against Burning of Quran, Hate Speech,” by Sara Zouiten, Morocco World News, July 26, 2023:
Rabat – The United Nations General Assembly, comprising 193 member states, unanimously adopted a resolution presented by Morocco against the burning of the Quran and hate speech targeting religious symbols.
The resolution strongly condemns all acts of violence perpetrated against individuals based on their religion or beliefs and the desecration of sacred texts, stressing that such behavior violates international law.
Championing the cause of peace and tolerance, Morocco has garnered widespread acclaim for its role as a regional and global leader in promoting peace, tolerance, and interreligious and intercultural dialogue.
The presentation and adoption of the resolution come amid rising concerns about Islamophobia and the challenges that Muslim communities face in Europe, with the most recent incident being the burning of the Quran in Sweden.
The event garnered widespread attention and condemnation from the international community, with many warning that such actions create an environment of fear and hostility for Muslims.
During the presentation of the resolution to the General Assembly, Morocco’s Permanent Representative to the UN Ambassador Omar Hilale underlined that this resolution builds upon resolution 73/328 adopted in 2019, which was the first of its kind on hate speech.
It also builds on resolution 75/309, which proclaimed June 18 as the “International Day for Countering Hate Speech,” to be observed each year.
Hilale noted that the adoption of the new resolution aligns with the visionary, solidarity-driven, and humanitarian approach of King Mohammed VI in standing against hate speech, extremism, and all forms of racism.
The ambassador recalled the monarch’s speech during the opening of the 9th World Forum of the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations, which took place in Fez in November 2022……
mike says
UN you can not tell me what I can and can not do
I will never follow your rules
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Couldn’t a few countries, such as Italy, India, Israel, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Japan… have tossed in an amendment outlawing the desecration of other holy books as well – the Bible, Tohra, Buddhist Sutras, the Vedas, Puranas, Daoist and Shinto scriptures and so on? Then crack down on any muslim country like a ton of bricks when anybody desecrates any of those books!
somehistory says
If the reps at the UN thought about it as you do, then, yes, they could have done that. But, they don’t think like you do, and they don’t want to think like you do. They don’t want to “crack down” on those countries or those rabid mozlums.
James Lincoln says
Painfully true, somehistory.
mick says
…or statues or gravestones.
Jayell1 says
Surely any law against the desecration of ‘sacred’ texts would have to include a definition of what constitutes a ‘sacred text’, which vary from country to country (as with all laws), and any attempt by the UN or any one country to impose its own definition around the world would have to be rejected outright.
somehistory says
Burning a book which someone….any number of someones…considers “sacred” is a ‘violation’ of “international law”?
Everyone should immediately decide that some book somewhere written by someone is “sacred” and since the mozlums have destroyed several libraries in recent years, they are ***guilty*** of this “violation.”
He says this burning creates “fear and hostility ***for*** molzums.” No. mozlums create the “fear and hostility” for everyone else. And they do this creating even when no one is burning their book. They use “violence” against everyone who has a different set of values and beliefs.
I would like to point out that he left off an “in’
“in promoting peace, tolerance, and interreligious and intercultural dialogue.” ;the “in” should be on the word that comes after “peace” and what is more, they should leave off the peace word. Just say the Truth: they promote “intolerance” toward everyone else, while demanding to be welcomed.
And…this was “unanimous”…meaning the U.S. went right along and soon, Americans will no longer be allowed to Tell the Truth about islam…as well as every other person where this unlawful and hideous ruling will be enforced, or face arrest and….
. Its evil….and I say, straight from satan the devil, his wild beast and the false prophet.
Rarely says
The definition they use of the word “tolerance” is simply that the rest of humanity must be “tolerant of their intolerance”.
Michael Copeland says
“If anyone desire a religion other than Islam never will it be accepted of him”
Koran 3:85, part of Islamic law.
somehistory says
Yes, and like the word “sacred” and “religion” and “peace”….they believe they only have “sacred” texts, they only have a “religion” and their version of peace is war until all of us are dead….dead in body or dead in spirit and soul. It’s our choice, the only choice they allow.
Be literally dead or dead inside as they are.
Ray Jarman says
On the first day of a class at the University of Maryland, the professor, James Herzog, told the class to keep in mind that the term “International Law” does not exist. The UN may have a vote concerning any issue but it has no power to enforce it. Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 states that not even the executive branch can force a UN resolution upon us. As mentioned so many times here at JW, I believe that like the failure of League of Nations, the United Nations has far out lived its raison d’état. It has become a minaret where nations that espouse the evil of Sharia rule.
Clifford Fodor says
It was a mistake to allow Muslim countries into the UN. It was mistake also to allow Turkey to become a member of NATO. Begone, Turkey!
Deodata says
Trump had the right idea to get out, it’s pro jihadist you only have to look at say the members who are on the human rights council.
OLD GUY says
The UN is a club of countries and has no power over individuals. If I want to burn trash the UN has no say in it. I thought the UN was supposed to be about protecting individual freedoms, not restricting them.
davidafoot says
What I always say holds true here: if we allowed a ” World Government by the UN” it would be “The Government of the losers” and the power exerted by the large number of representatives of the users of the manual of misogyny and terrorism over the UN proves that my description is a true one.
They have told the UN to issue an edict interfering with the right to a property and the freedom of ideas inside its states!
As you can appreciate, we deal with intolerable and deadly despotism of Islam which takes the life of innocent people who disagree with its despotism and misrule all the time and the UN is not moved by these many aggressions against the vulnerable inside Islamic borders but the UN is moved instead by the power of the numbers of representatives of supporters of the Islamic aggression.
Where does the UN draw such a power, England never agreed to that over-reach!
Islam is the cult of an empire, it is an empire with an infernal cult bolted on.
Islam seeks power beyond its borders impinging here on the right of property and the freedom of speech and ideas in countries which do not recognise Islamic supremacy and it is forcing the UN to abuse its own powers in favour of Islam using their sheer numbers without a right to do this.
What right can the cult of evil have over my property to tell me what I can or can’t do with it, like that I can’t burn it.
What right can the cult of evil have to tell me that I can’t burn or destroy an evil manual containing instructions of terrorism and misogyny and many more evils?
The UN has no right to operate in the fields of ideas or of individual’s property inside its member states! The UN has totally overreached its attributions.