Friday, October 25, 2019

THE PROGRESSIVE POLITIC OF SHARIA

THE PROGRESSIVE 
POLITICS OF SHARIA 


Photo source: https://www.universal-rights.org/blog/the-arc-of-the-covenant-the-unfinished-business-of-un-efforts-to-combat-religious-intolerance/attachment/5940678519_e258f86288_o/
Are the 57 nations of the O.I.C. opposing Religious Defamation, or modifying their methods of enforcing Sharia and Sharia Blasphemy Laws? 

Does the Western practice of punishment through the "Teaching Laws,"  of "Political correctness," mirror the model of the Sharia? Some say absolutely...

(An opinionated link at: )https://barenakedislam.com/2018/09/30/here-they-go-again-the-latest-attempt-by-the-organization-of-islamic-cooperation-oic-to-have-the-un-enforce-sharia-compliant-blasphemy-laws/)

But to avoid biased interpretation, why not hear from the Secretary General himself on the topic.

Hear interviews with the recent leader of the (O.I.C.) who cosponsored and won unanimous support for U.N. Resolution 16/18, (opposing the disrespecting of religion and specifically any discrimination against followers of Isam), with the help of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at: 


and:


THE ORGANIZATION OF ISLAMIC COOPERATION (O.I.C.), was founded in 1969. It ascribes to the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam,at: http://www.icnl.org/research/library/files/Transnational/HRI-En.pdf

and the Covenant on the Rights of the Child in Islam at:

Both documents call for the implementation of Sharia as a basic human right, and view the absence of Sharia as a deprivation of human rights.

Subsequently The (O.I.C.) DOES NOT fully ASCRIBE to the 1948 United Nations Human Rights Declaration. 

The (O.I.C.) is the second largest inter-governmental organization in the world, second only to the United Nations with it's 57 member states, and comprises the largest voting block in the United Nations.

View an informative video following the themes of this article 

at:
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ey-TRpkUiPI

For the last 15 years the (I.O.C.) has worked in the U.N. to achieve INTERNATIONAL LEGAL STANDING FOR SHARIA BLASPHEMY LAWS. It's stated mission is to partner with specialized U.N. agencies, foreign governments, and civil organizations to address issues of concern to (O.I.C.) member states and to Muslims worldwide. In 2005, it adopted a ten-year plan to address additional issues including terrorism, poor governance, economic inequality and to closely monitor acts Islamophobia.

In keeping with this goal a website for monitoring, incidents of Islamophobia is found at:  http://www.oic-oci.org/oicv3/page/?p_id=182&p_ref=61&lan=en

Although identifying Religious Defamation is the stated goal, and Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu speaks to the West about displeasure with antisemitism  and anti-Christian attitudes, ONLY ACTS OF ISLAMOPHOBIA are recorded on the site, and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation DOES NOT MONITOR ACTS of religious persecution COMMITED BY MUSIMS against NON-MUSLIMS. As directed by it's founders. It does not monitor, regulate or discourage Muslims from proselytizing or imposing Sharia Law on Non-Muslim populations as in the case of Asia Bibi.


Even before the 9/11 attacks the (I.O.C.) expressed concern over the possibility of discrimination against the followers of Islam and pushed for international resolutions to stop them.

The original resolutions asserted that Islam is wrongly associated with human rights violations; Islam is wrongly associated with terrorism; and that there has been an “intensified campaign” of discrimination, defamation, profiling, and religious hatred waged against Islam and Muslims since the wake of 9/11. The resolutions further request States to “take action, to combat defamation of all religions and incitement to religious hatred in general and against Islam and Muslims in particular. They also assert that “respect for religions” and “protection from contempt” are necessary for freedom of thought and conscience.

See more detailed contextual and historical information at:

This (O.I.C.) effort to give Sharia blasphemy laws international legal standing at the United Nations eventually WON MAJORITY SUPPORT in 2011, when their 57 member states outvoted the United States and Western European representatives. The west opposed the original resolutions due to it's wording on restrictions on freedom of expression. A language compromise dropped direct reference to the terms, blasphemy and defamation in the measure, and RESOLUTION 16/18 was then CO-SPONSORED BY U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE HILLARY CLINTON and passed by unanimous consent. 

She called the resolution, "A LANDMARK ACHIEVEMENT."

She said that it affirms "the positive role that the exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the full respect for the freedom to seek, receive and impart information can play in strengthening democracy and combating religious intolerance."

That it "condemns any advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, whether it involves the use of print, audio-visual or electronic media or any other means."

And it creates a list of "actions to foster a domestic environment of religious tolerance, peace and respect," and it calls on states to adopt "MEASURES TO CRIMINALIZE incitement to imminent violence based on religion or belief."

You may recall that 2011 was also the year that Hillary gave her famous LGBT speech. Given before the United Nations, it proclaimed the need for, "TEACHING LAW," in America and across the globe to end the persecution of LGBTQ citizens and to advance the status of the LGBTQ cause globally.




Hear her entire speech at: 


In her speech she emphasized how TEACHING LAWS were created and then enforced to achieve Civil Rights advancement here in America. How TEACHING LAWS gave direction and emboldened  population as guiding mandates to achieve progress in many ways including the actions of Affirmative Actions and Forced Busing for school integration.

Unfortunately the (O.I.C.) has a MUCH STRONGER VIEW OF TEACHING LAW..i.e. SHARIA, and DOES NOT ACCEPT WESTERN ideas of TOLERANCE IN RELIGION or SEXUAL EXPRESSION. The (O.I.C.) has repeatedly used their leadership to rejected any movement toward equal rights for LGBTQ individuals or to improve their status as citizens. Officially the (O.I.C.) has consistently REFUSED TO RECOGNIZE THE LEGALITY of any of the United Nations Human Rights Council Resolutions on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity as seen at:



RESOLUTION 16/18 (tolerance for Sharia and blasphemy law, is now International U.N. Law) AS VIEWED BY the REPRESENTATIVE LEADER OF ISLAM

Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu, then-Secretary-General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, made it clear in a 2012 interview... "The (O.I.C.) and I as secretary am a staunch supporter of freedom of expression," "BUT freedom of expression, ACCORDING TO INTERNATIONAL LAW, does not entail freedom of insulting others, denigrating others, mocking others." "Just as no one has the right to randomly scream "Fire!" in a crowded theater, no one has the right to insult Mohammed if others might respond violently.

When pressed as to whether, "making fun of a religion could cause incitement to violence," İhsanoğlu was adamant and specifically said that cartoons that mock Mohammed should be banned, in France and elsewhere.

"If you don’t respect the feelings of 1.5 billion people, and if you don’t feel yourself responsible not to insult them, then we have a problem here. And if we have a problem here, we will have a problem there, with the demonstrations and taking to street and using violence," İhsanoğlu said.

View interview at:



A year later, in a speech in Moscow, İhsanoğlu praised Resolution 16/18 for ADVANCING THE PRINCIPLE THAT FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION DOES NOT INCLUDE THE RIGHT TO DEFAME RELIGION.

The record is clear. The governments of the Islamic majority of nations in the U.N. SEE NO CONFLICT between the enforcement of, "Teaching Law," in America with Resolution 16/18 and the enforcement of (Blasphemy) LAWS THAT BAN cartoons of Mohammed or ANY other PUBLIC ACTS THAT OFFEND BELIEVERS IN ISLAM...(which according to Sharia include building any non Islamic place of worship or repairing an existing one, or any non Islamic public act of worship or non Islamic proselytizing, or kissing in public, dress code violations, refusing to pay Jizya tax... and... and... according to Sharia.)

note: paragraph directly above (extrapolated) and CAPS emphasis added.


Blasphemy Law and Religious Defamation as per the (O.I.C.)/(UN)

WHAT ARE THE OUTCOMES?
DISRESPECTING THE MAJORITY....

For those in the west, subject to the U.N. 1948 Declaration of Human Rights, TEACHING LAWS are to increase, and WESTERN SELF-CENSORSHIP WILL BE REALIZED and ENFORCED by........

Punishment of actions viewed as disrespecting or discriminating against ANY RELIGIOUS MINORITY in general, and SPECIFICALLY MUSLIMS, and the LGBTQ community will be enforced including expression related to RACE, ETHNICITY, RELIGION or the BEHAVIORS or CULTURAL PRACTICES of these groups. 

Subsequently, CRITICAL COMMENTS, and ACTS OF DISCRIMINATION will NOT BE TOLERATED (specifically anti-defamation of Muslims or LGBTQ individuals) and Western Diplomats, Legislators, and Educators WILL ABIDE BY AND PROMOTE these values ACCORDING TO INTERNATIONAL LAW, (U.N. Resolutions 16/18 and 17/19).

For those in the 57 countries under Islamic rule and followers of Islam across the globe, (subject to the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights), the leader of the 57 Nation (I.O.C.), Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu presented a similar DUTY TO CENSOR SELF and to PUNISH OTHERS. 

His followers are to PUBLICLY CENSOR individuals to avoid (culturally justified) VIOLENT public REACTION to acts that defy SHARIA LAW, and to REFRAIN FROM VIGILANTE REACTIONS even though justifiably outraged and insulted. They are (NOW) instructed to let the official administrators of Sharia Law oversee punitive actions ACCORDING TO SHARIA LAW. 

A FAILED QUID PRO QUO....
AS WE PLAY BY DIFFERENT RULES

The steadfastness of the (O.I.C.) to maintain complete diplomatic harmony with the teaching of Sharia have resulted in repeated and strongly stated rejections of U.N. Pro-LGBTQ Resolutions, including (U.N. Resolution 17/19). Their non compliance with these provisions although it is nonbinding, is in sharp contrast to the mandates enacted into TEACHING LAWS in Western countries. In the 1.5 billion follower of Islam that the (I.O.C) represents,  they have created the PERCEPTION that  MORAL STRENGTH is expressed through FIRM RIGIDITY as they continue to refuse to accept any Legal Resolution NOT IN COMPLETE COMPLIANCE WITH SHARIA LAW. Although there is disagreement and infighting over succession  of the leadership in the Islamic Faith, there is significant agreement here.  

COMMENT:

Isn't it ironic that our 1st Amendment allows Hillary to speak freely and critically about the religious faith and teachings of so many here in American (because they are the majority), even to the point of labeling Christian teachings as, "Hate Speech," but cannot speak similarly about the violent acts and repressive actions and teaching of many faiths because they are a minority that we have chosen to protect from scrutiny.

ADDITIONAL OUTCOMES in the article entitled ENDANGERING MINORITIES found at: https://plus.google.com/116167242209081966340/posts/6Ck33c2Lrk8  - It presents Islamic reaction to the promotion of LGBT rights through the US State Department and increased persecution of  Christians who are seen as representatives of western values and other minorities since these Resolutions and subsequent destabilization through warfare.

The tragic example in the article below on Salmaan Taseer's assination and the celebration of that act by Pakistan's religious culture is an excellent historical reference point. It shows a prominent "justifiable acts of violence related to Sharia", now inferred to be avoidable by censorship according to international law. (click link or photo directly below for story) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/jan/08/salmaan-taseer-blasphemy-pakistan-bibi

The assassinations of Governor Salmaan Taseer on January 4, 2011 and Cabinet Minister Shabaz Bahti  on March 2, 2011 closely preceded, but had little impact on the signing of both of these UN Resolutions. 

Taseer and Bahti can be heard in the following  playlist below containing  a series of video clips on the topic of "MODERN REFORMATIONS," comparing the US and Pakistani struggle with human rights.

For a reflective view, see playlist at:
or 
for overwiew.


Hear the former leader of the (OIC) and cosponsor of (UN Resolution 16/18) at:
and
(also seen above)


at