Concerns about an Islamic-sponsored ?combating intolerance? initiative at the United Nations are brought into sharp relief by results of a new world surveyon religious persecution.
Muslim nations make up nine out of the top ten countries where Christians face the ?most severe? persecution, and 38 of the top 50, reports U.S.-basedOpen Doors in its 2012 World Watch List.
Topping the list is North Korea, where the Stalinist regime enforces cult worship of its leaders.
The results lay bare the sheer incongruity of the idea that the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), whose 56 member states control more than a quarter of the votes in the UN General Assembly, can be serious about promoting religious tolerance.
Yet that is what it claimed by successfully pushing for an assembly http://www.un.org/en/ga/third/66/proposalstatus.shtml&;Lang=E" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">resolutiontitled ?Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping, stigmatization, discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against persons, based on religion or belief.? The measure, which passed last month, mirrored an almost identical resolution in the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) in Geneva last March.
The assembly resolution, which the United Arab Emirates tabled on behalf of the OIC, repeats the prior HRC measure?s call for governments to ?take effective measures to ensure that public functionaries, in the conduct of their public duties, do not discriminate against an individual on the basis of religion or belief.?
OIC member states want us to believe they are promoting that and the many other praiseworthy precepts of both resolutions even though a majority of them oppose the measures through their actions.
What?s more, a decade?s worth of Open Doors surveys shows that ?the persecution of Christians in these Muslim countries continues to increase,? the group?s Dr. Carl Moeller reports.
And so the question begs: If most OIC member states practice the opposite of each resolution?s stated intent, why did the organization launch the initiative?
The answer lies in the language of early drafts of the resolution the OIC shepherded through the Human Rights Council. Those drafts focused heavily on the idea that states should show tolerance for Muslim peoples around the world.
Western negotiators explained to their OIC counterparts that they needed to ?universalize? the language if the text was to stand any chance of winning Western support.
The OIC complied in order to see the Human Rights Council resolution succeed. Likewise, the current General Assembly resolution ? approved by consensus in a key assembly committee Nov. 15, and by the full assembly Dec. 19 ? conforms with universal rights doctrine when taken at face value.
But unspoken UN convention will ensure that the imprint of the earlier Muslim-specific language will remain in spirit. This will have the effect of giving Islamic countries added force when they speak out against incidents they believe to have slighted the Islamic faith.
Obvious past examples of perceived slights include the cartoon depictions of the Prophet Muhammad by a Danish newspaper in 2005.
For more than a decade, the OIC sought protection for Islam by annually pushing through resolutions that explicitly granted faiths the right not to be ?defamed.? It abandoned that cause last March when Western-led opposition had grown big enough to defeat it. The West argued that human rights protections extended only to individuals, not to beliefs.
In exchange for dropping the ?defamation? language, the OIC was rewarded with massive Western buy-in of their resolution. These included most famously the high-level events endorsing the resolution by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, first in Turkey and then in Washington, in joint appearances with the OIC leadership.
But while the OIC?s adoption of universal language for its ?combating intolerance? initiative won it Western support, no one is expecting change on the ground in the bulk of Islamic countries any time soon.
Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Iran, Maldives, Uzbekistan, Yemen, Iraq and Pakistan complete the Open Doors Watch List?s top ten persecutors of religious minorities ? in that order after North Korea.
Discrimination against religious minorities in these and many other Islamic countries on the Watch List is so deeply entrenched that it?s inconceivable they have the slightest intention of conforming to the precepts in the OIC draft they themselves have authored.
As such, the problem is not with the document per se, but with its sponsor. Simply put, the OIC initiative was not an honest one. That in itself should have raised alarm bells ? even as the language used appears to be generally in line with universal standards.
Norwegian Muslims Threaten Norway over Afghanistan
On the same day Norway?s intelligence service (PST) said hardline Islamists remained the foremost threat to national security, leading government officials and the royal family have been singled out
in a threatening online video.
A link to the video was posted in the early hours of Tuesday morning by a Facebook group with 1,600 members called Demonstration: Norwegian soldiers out of Afghanistan. The group?s aim is to gather protesters for a rally outside the Oslo parliament this Friday.
In the video, images of Crown Prince Haakon, Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg and Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr St?re are accompanied by a song in Arabic that contains the words: ?Oh Allah, destroy them, and let it be painful?.
The clip, which is just over four minutes long, also features pictures of Norwegian soldiers and injured children. It ends with the sound of an explosion and a picture of a Norwegian vehicle in flames.
Muslim Kills Unborn Baby Because Girlfriend Saw a Male Doctor...
A Muslim punches his pregnant girlfriend several times in the abdomen because she was examined by a male doctor.
Thanks to the heavy punches the unborn baby suffered cerebral haemorrhages while still in its mother's womb. It was possible for it to be delivered later through emergency Caesarian section, but it died of its serious injuries two days later in the hospital.
As the child was not born at the time of the action, the indictment against the 21-year-old refers only to "abortion" and not to murder.
The starting point for the fateful event was a routine gynaecological examination of the pregnant woman. As the female doctor who was usually responsible for her was on holiday, the examination was performed by a male substitute on an exceptional basis. For the then 20-year-old boyfriend of the heavily pregnant woman, a practising Muslim, this was horrific.
When the Rheine resident learned of the examination by the doctor, a major row broke out between the couple. In this the perpetrator is said to have struck his seven-month pregnant girlfriend forcefully several times in the abdomen, so that she had to be taken to a hospital, where the foetus died after an emergency birth.
UPDATE: The Muslim got 2 years and 9 months for this. His name is Ahmad Sherzai, of Afghan origin but with German citizenship. His girlfriend was of German origin and from a Catholic family.
Both Sherzai and his father ("a devout family") have had a long history of trouble with the police. Why are our governments allowing these savages into our countries then not deporting them when their criminality is proven?
KINGSTON, Ontario (AP) ? A jury on Sunday found three members of an Afghan family guilty of killing three teenage sisters and another woman in what the judge described as "cold-blooded, shameful murders" resulting from a "twisted concept of honor," ending a case that shocked and riveted Canadians.
Prosecutors said the defendants allegedly killed the three teenage sisters because they dishonored the family by defying its disciplinarian rules on dress, dating, socializing and using the Internet.
The jury took 15 hours to find Mohammad Shafia, 58; his wife Tooba Yahya, 42; and their son Hamed, 21, each guilty of four counts of first-degree murder. First-degree murder carries an automatic life sentence with no chance of parole for 25 years.
After the verdict was read, the three defendants again declared their innocence in the killings of sisters Zainab, 19, Sahar 17, and Geeti, 13, as well as Rona Amir Mohammad, 52, Shafia's childless first wife in a polygamous marriage.
Their bodies were found June 30, 2009, in a car submerged in a canal in Kingston, Ontario, where the family had stopped for the night on their way home to Montreal from Niagara Falls, Ontario.
The prosecution alleged it was a case of premeditated murder, staged to look like an accident after it was carried out. Prosecutors said the defendants drowned their victims elsewhere on the site, placed their bodies in the car and pushed it into the canal.
Ontario Superior Court Judge Robert Maranger said the evidence clearly supported the conviction.
"It is difficult to conceive of a more heinous, more despicable, more honorless crime," Maranger said. "The apparent reason behind these cold-blooded, shameful murders was that the four completely innocent victims offended your completely twisted concept of honor ... that has absolutely no place in any civilized society."
In a statement following the verdict, Canadian Justice Minister Rob Nicholson called honor killings a practice that is "barbaric and unacceptable in Canada."
President Obama apologized Thursday in a letter to Afghan President Hamid Karzai for the burning of Korans at the largest American military base in Afghanistan, according to the White House and Karzai's office. The incident at Bagram Air Base has fueled days of angry protests in the war-torn country. "I wish to express my deep regret for the reported incident," Karzai's office quoted Obama as saying in the message. "The error was inadvertent; I assure you that we will take the appropriate steps to avoid any recurrence, to include holding accountable those responsible."
Three days of protests over the incident have left 14 people dead, including two American soldiers shot dead when an Afghan soldier turned his weapon on them at their base in Khogyani in eastern Nangarhar province, district governor Mohammad Hassan told AFP.
White House officials declined to challenge the wording.
US Ambassador Ryan Crocker delivered the letter to Karzai on Thursday afternoon, local time, according to US National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor.
Obama "expressed our regret and apologies over the incident in which religious materials were unintentionally mishandled at Bagram Airbase," Vietor said in an emailed statement.
The incident, which occurred on Tuesday, led the Taliban to call on Afghans to retaliate against the US-led coalition forces in Afghanistan and drew a stern rebuke from Karzai himself earlier this week.
Sharia In America: Muslim Judge Frees Muslim Attacker; Scolds Victim For Insulting Islam
Not only did the muslim Judge dismiss charges against the muslim attacker (which was caught on video) and scold the victim for mocking muhammad, he is now threatening to jail the victim for recording the court proceedings.
Sharia In America: Muslim Judge Frees Muslim Attacker; Scolds Victim For Insulting Islam
That is the injustice of Sharia law - muslims face lenient punishments, if any at all, when the victim is a non-muslim, and non-muslims face very harsh punishments for minor or no infractions.
Inside Look at Congressional Briefing on Islamization of America
Victoria Jackson gives an account of the briefing she attended at the House Office Longworth Building. The briefing was given by an ex-FBI agent. He showed pictures, names, dates, Islamic law books, Korans and Surahs. Victoria shares how the Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated our highest positions in government and how they are working with Hilary Clinton to get 'Islamophobia' punishable by law.
American Muslims give prison bound Jihadi standing ovation
A defiant Tarek Mehanna was A A defiant Tarek Mehanna was sentenced Thursday to 17 1/2 years in prison for conspiring to kill American soldiers and supporting Al Qaeda, culminating a dramatic terrorism case in which the Sudbury man emphatically professed his devotion to Islam and his anger at America?s support of ?unjust policies against its minorities.??
The 29-year-old Mehanna compared his call for jihad against US soldiers who kill Muslim civilians to America?s Revolutionary War against England. He showed no remorse as he was about to be sentenced in US District Court in Boston, and at one point called a prosecutor a liar.
?It is because of America that I am who I am,?? he declared.
US District Court Judge George A. O?Toole Jr. said he found Mehanna?s speech to the court Thursday to be evidence of his ?strong and magnetic?? personality, but said he also saw a darker ?Jekyll and Hyde?? side to Mehanna.
?We all do acts, both good and evil, in the course of our life,?? the judge said. ?But just as two wrongs don?t make a right, two rights don?t excuse a wrong, and the wrong still must be punished.??
The judge said he was disappointed with the show of defiance and ?frankly concerned by the defendant?s apparent absence of remorse.??
At a press conference later, US Attorney Carmen M. Ortiz said that Mehanna ?faced the consequences of his actions, for conspiring to support terrorists, for conspiring to kill Americans overseas, and for lying to the FBI.??
The case had nothing to do with Mehanna?s religion or his free speech, she said.
?Our goal is to do justice and do whatever we can to keep the people of this Commonwealth and our country safe,?? she said. ?We are not prosecuting individuals because they are Muslim. We prosecute people because they engage in criminal conduct, [people] who are violent, who are committing crimes.??
Mehanna had faced life in prison under federal sentencing guidelines; prosecutors asked that he serve at least 25 years.
O?Toole said he considered Mehanna?s depth of family and community support, while balancing the severity and nature of the terrorism charges.
But the slightly lighter sentence did little to dissuade the protests of Mehanna?s supporters, who had turned out in droves during his nine-week trial and who packed the courtroom and an overflow room Thursday.
They gave Mehanna a standing ovation as he was escorted from the courtroom following the sentencing, shouting, ?I love you.?? Outside the court they rallied, wearing yellow ribbons and Free Tarek T-shirts, while shouting, ?Free Tarek Now.?? http://articles.boston.com/2012-04-1...eech-courtroom
The happiest people don't necessarily have the best of everything; they just make the best of everything they have.
Education does not guarantee intelligence.
Prepare for the worst and you won't be disappointed.
Egypt plans 'farewell intercourse law' so husbands can have sex with DEAD wives up to six hours after their death
Egyptian husbands will soon be legally allowed to have sex with their dead wives - for up to six hours after their death.
The controversial new law is part of a raft of measures being introduced by the Islamist-dominated parliament.
It will also see the minimum age of marriage lowered to 14 and the ridding of women's rights of getting education and employment.
Egypt's National Council for Women is campaigning against the changes, saying that 'marginalising and undermining the status of women would negatively affect the country's human development'.
Dr Mervat al-Talawi, head of the NCW, wrote to the Egyptian People?s Assembly Speaker Dr Saad al-Katatni addressing her concerns.
Egyptian journalist Amro Abdul Samea reported in the al-Ahram newspaper that Talawi complained about the legislations which are being introduced under 'alleged religious interpretations'.
The subject of a husband having sex with his dead wife arose in May 2011 when Moroccan cleric Zamzami Abdul Bari said marriage remains valid even after death.
He also said that women have the right to have sex with her dead husband, alarabiya.net reported.
It seems the topic, which has sparked outrage, has now been picked up on by Egypt's politicians.
TV anchor Jaber al-Qarmouty slammed the notion of letting a husband have sex with his wife after her death under the so-called 'Farewell Intercourse' draft law.
He said: 'This is very serious. Could the panel that will draft the Egyptian constitution possibly discuss such issues? Did Abdul Samea see by his own eyes the text of the message sent by Talawi to Katatni?
'This is unbelievable. It is a catastrophe to give the husband such a right! Has the Islamic trend reached that far? Is there really a draft law in this regard? Are there people thinking in this manner?'