« Freedom of Speech at risk in Italy | Main | Problems »
June 29, 2005
Special Treatment And Recognition For Muslims - OIC wants permanent UN Security Council seat: Europe and America, are you listening?
Let's make it clear here at the get-go for the UN Security Council. Terrorists are Muslims, suicide bombers are Muslims, car bombers are Muslims, the one so-called religion that has no tolerance of other religions is Islam(Muslim), the only religion(sic) that desires special treatment over other religions is Islam, and the world-wide war on terror is a war on members of a particular religion(sic) called Islam(Muslims).
What about this does the UN Security Council find hard to understand? Special treatment for Muslims? You can't criticize Islam? Make sure that our government and non-Muslim world leaders say NO, HELL NO to such a ridiculous demand! (and be sure to read the email dialogue on Club Gitmo, and the summary, in the extended post)
InTheBullPen has a piece that caught my attention today, entitled "Muslims Demand Permanent Seat on UN Security Council." Since I am very familiar with the Islamic agenda, their proclamation of a need for special treatment for Muslims doesn't surprise me, but the fact that they so blatantly do so alarms me. The Secretary-General of the Organization of Islamic Conference proposed to the UN and the European Organization for Security and Cooperation that measures be legislated to prohibit people from voicing a dislike for Islam coupled with a demand for permanent Muslim representation on the UN Security Council. Have they lost their minds, or do they think that we've lost ours?
There are 57 countries represented in the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) which meets regularly to discuss" solidarity and mutual interests." Yesterday, the organization met, opening with a statement by Secretary-General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu. Salient points include:
Honourable Ministers,
In the face of the intensification of Islamophobia in the West(Earned and well-deserved I might add), I have seen it as a duty to launch a campaign against this detestable phenomenon, and We have approached the United Nations Human Rights Committee in Geneva in this connection. We succeeded to have the Committee adopt a resolution prohibiting defamation of religions, in particular Islam, as well as linking it with terrorism. We also took the campaign to the United Nations General Assembly asking it to make efforts in this regard. In the same vein, we went to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, and managed to convince it to place the matter in its agenda and admitted that defamation of Islam has become a fundamental challenge in the field of human rights in Europe.
Since the enlargement of the Security Council has become a pressing issue in the agenda of the United Nations, we have made extensive efforts in concert with the Islamic Group at the United Nations in New York to ensure a permanent representation for the Muslim world in the Security Council. For the Muslim world, that is one fifth of the world's population, cannot remain excluded from the activities of the Security Council which assumes a fundamental role in keeping security and peace in the world.
In summary, the OIC has proposed to the UN and the European Organization for Security and Cooperation that measures be legislated to prohibit people from voicing a dislike for Islam coupled with a demand for permanent Muslim representation on the UN Security Council. They want their religion to have representation as a NATION and they don't want their religion(sic) to be subject to criticism, a criticism that it has earned.
Mike at ITBP comments:
"It's encouraging that the people of Islam recognize and are concerned that they are seen negatively by the West. However, my take is that no rules or laws will ever impact the level of Islamophobia as long as the Muslim world views terrorism as an integral aspect of diplomacy. It also seems illogical to award a permanent seat on the Security Council to any country that silently, without condemnation, accepts terrorism as a substitute for statesmanship."
But Mike is being a little too polite, way too politically correct. Let's take a look at a couple of emails that ended up in my hands - together, there's some real perspective to be gained.
AZ (a non-American ex-'foreign government' pilot commenting on Club Gitmo),
I am now getting a very good wealth of information from military, ex military and press sources which gives me a much better and balanced view of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts and the aftermath.
Many many thanks for the material on GITMO and from Colonel Cuccullu. I sense that his views are honest and as impartial as he can make them. However, he gets at the root of it all when he comments that the detainees have it "real good " and are "treated with amazing compassion" and are looked after in "plush environs".
I have lived and worked in Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, the Emirates, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Malaysia and Indonesia. I am fully familiar with Arab culture and Muslim doctine. I have a beautifully illustrated copy of the KORAN in my library - written in Parsi and English for comparison.
To treat fundamentalists indoctrined by the religious leaders - kindly, will get absolutely nowhere and will waste time and energy. One must earn respect the hard way from such people.
Either you are a person of consequence or a person of no consequence and if you are the latter, then you will be killed or at least severely injured and then brushed aside. You cannot and must not use Western and non-Islamic standards in dealing with Islamic extremists. It is a hard and sad fact of life because they have not forgotten the Crusades of King Richard's days. Christianity and Islam are still in conflict both in terms of culture and religion.
Our politicians refuse to face up to this fact and is the cause of much self imposed racial tension. Of course they are after whatever votes they can get and from whatever source, so that they avoid offending "our brothers".
Forgive me for saying this, but from time to time, the American administration is very naiive in its dealings with others and this lack of understanding of language and culture is often the cause of it.
Can you believe that church bells can be rung for weddings on Saturdays but are no longer rung on Sundays for church services in Britain.
However, the mullahs can scream their heads off from the towers of the mosques on Fridays. And my friend, we are beginning to reach the stage where we have more mosques than churches !!!!!!
Additionally, one must understand the Iraqi - Iranian conflict and the role of the bin Laden family and the links between America and Saudi leading up to the split and the setting up of al-Qaeda. The deeper that one digs, then the more unsavoury is the finding.
History records how Colonel Mitchell of the Argyle and Sutherland Highlanders handled the rebel insurgents in the Yemen in the 1960's. This problem was solved in weeks with what the West would now regard as some very heavy handed action. The rebels did not come back for any more !!!
I am not a racist and I treat others irrespective of race, colour and creed on the basis of their behaviour. But for some, my patience is rapidly running out.
Thanks for listening / AK
AK (an American Ex-Marine commenting on Club Gitmo),
Truth is truth, regardless of who speaks it. My study of Islam is strictly academic, no boots on the ground experiences such as yours. But, if I were to reduce the essential differences of Christianity and Islam to sound bites, I would first announce that "Christ died for his religion, Mohammed murdered for his". Then we'd go on from there.
I have Bosnian Muslims married to members of my family. I have a cousin married to a Saudi national. Save for a billion practitioners of the faith, my reading strongly suggests that "Islam is a sham religion foisted on the faithful by a degenerate Bedouin".
Islam is still a "flat earth religion". It has not undergone an Enlightenment, nor is it allowed to, even in this age of archeology, carbon dating etc. The Judeo-Christian faith has survived its examinations, has modified its responses to "sinful" behaviors, has accepted Biblical contradictions of "fact", all without collapsing. Islam fears this process.
Unworldly, and largely uneducated mullahs, have created a hell on earth. Islam a religion of peace? That's not what my Rorschach reveals. If the Judeo-Christian God and Islam's Allah are the same fella then one must assume over the course of 600 years God changed his mind about a lot of stuff, or Alzheimer's disease is a lot older than we realize. / AZ
As I wrote in a previous post in which I quoted Daniel Pipes: "While Muslim demands to change our history and accomodate their religious sensitivities may seem relatively minor in and of themselves, implying no drastic alterations in existing American arrangements but rather only slight adjustments in our already expansive accommodation of social "diversity," cumulatively, however, by whittling away at the existing order, they would change the country's whole way of life--making Islam a major public presence, ensuring that both the workplace and the educational system accommodate its dictates and strictures, adapting family customs to its code of conduct, winning it a privileged position in American life, and finally imposing its system of law.
Cross posted at Hyscience
Posted by Richard at June 29, 2005 3:52 PM
