The UN’s human-rights body approved a proposal by Muslims nations Thursday urging passage of laws around the world to protect religion from criticism.
The proposal put forward by Pakistan on behalf of Islamic countries – with the backing of Belarus and Venezuela – had drawn strong criticism from free-speech campaigners and liberal democracies.
A simple majority of 23 members of the 47-nation Human Rights Council voted in favor of the resolution. Eleven nations, mostly Western, opposed the resolution, and 13 countries abstained.
The resolution urges states to provide “protection against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions and incitement to religious hatred in general.”
“Defamation of religions is the cause that leads to incitement to hatred, discrimination and violence toward their followers,” Pakistan’s ambassador Zamir Akram said. (Heyyy, Zamir, so what about discrimination against non-Muslims in Islamic countries? Are they going to be protected against discrimination? No, right?)
“It is important to deal with the cause, rather than with the effects alone,” he said.
I had written before about this really worrying (at least for me) subject. It’s curious though: there are NO Spanish MSM which have published something about this, that I know of.
But you know what’s curious too? That the Organization for the Security and the Cooperation in Europe has alerted of the discrimination that Christians are suffering in Europe:
Last March 4th, for the 1st time in its history, the office of the Organization for the Security and the Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), for the Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR), organised a debate in Vienna specially focused in the risks the right to religious liberty regarding Christians, experiment in Europe.
The intervention of Mario Mauro, VicePresident of the European Parliament, was the most interesting of all. He is also the personal representative of the OSCE Presidency against racism, xenophobia and discrimination. the MEP explained that the “examples show that that discriminations against Christians do not only exist in the countries where the Christians are a minority but also in those in which they are a majority of the population, not considering the persecutions that strike these communities outside the OSCE’s area”.
(…) But, why does the Organization for the Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) worry now about the abused rights of Christians? The answer was pointed out in the same debate, remembering that hate and intolerance do not only affect the people’s security but also to country’s stability. That’s why the Organization has decided lately to intensify the efforts to counter these discriminative cases more efficiently in the future.
It seems that Christians are mainly discriminated even in Christian countries. Something which is really worrying…
NOTE that they are NOT worried about the discrimination considerated as an unlawful and unethical fact, but because it can affect country’s stability. Specially in this economic crisis…
Anyway where are the riots? Where the enraged statements made by Governments about Christian persecution? Where the Pope’s statements calling for the murder of those insulting Catholicism/Orthodox/etc.? Where the cartoonists are obliged to live in hiding because they draw a cartoon mocking Jesus Christ or the Church (whatever Church it is)? So, now tell me who did all these things and what religion the belong to now, in this very same moment. Just in case someone begins speaking about “Christian extremism” or something like that…
If we read the statement made by the secretary general of the Moroccan Community Abroad Council (a consultive bureau created by Moroccan King Mohammed VIth), Abdellah Boussouff, we can really consider that as a reality. He nearly goes as far as considering Moroccan as equal as Spanish Muslim.
(He) stated to the Spanish news agency Europa Press during a meeting about Islam in Europe which took place in Fez, that Moroccan nationals living in Spain “need a strong organization that defends the fulfillment of the religious freedom” in the country and for the “full practice of their rights”.
(…) (He also) added that some of the points that were included in the cooperation aggreement between Spain and the Islamic Commission in 1992 “are not fully applied”, pointing to the need of a “really representative and democratic organism because a lot of Muslims do not feel represented by the Islamic Commission” (name which are not fully applied and why a lot of Muslims do not feel represented by the Islamic Commission. I am not saying the latter is “moderate”, I’m saying that it would be interesting to know what is the future Morocco wants for Spanish Muslims, as pointing out what Spain lacks of in this respect would underline what they like Spanish Islam to be).
He maintains that they are “optimistic with Moroccan community’s progress in Spain”, because “all processes need time” and “both Spain and Morocco have a lot of things in common” (name a few… because except the Spanish-Moroccan war of late XIXth century and early XXth century and the Strait of Gibraltar, I just can’t really see what more).
As a special measure, Boussouff considers that the Islamic Council must create a census of Muslims in Spain that could chose their representatives directly, as it’s already done in France and Belgium (countries where there is NO radicalization of Muslims, is there? Ironically speaking, that is...).
But it’s not me the only one who thinks this is meddling in other State’s affairs:
These statements have been regarded by the Spanish Islamic Communities’ Union as a Moroccan meddling in Islam’s management inside Spanish territory.
The president of this Union, Riay Tatary, stated that the “Moroccan Government is not the indicated entity to speak about the management of the Muslim community inside Spain and how their leaders should be elected” (so, Tatary, are you feeling your chair moving under you?).
Anyway, this must be the first time I agree with Tatary in something, although of course, not for the same reasons: I am not the president of any Muslim organization There is something to consider,though: the growing number of Moroccan nationals in Spain (after Hispanic-American, they are the main immigrant group in Spain) makes this reaaaaaaaaally interesting for Morocco, who already wants Ceuta, Melilla and the Canary Islands in a expansionist policy, seen always not very disgustedly by France, a traditional Moroccan ally, and by UK, because of Gibraltar (of course, Spain does not have one thousand million Chinese menacing Hong Kong, does it? In that case, the results would have been truly different ).
Meddling in other State’s affairs does not make a country trustworthy. Trying to meddle over an entire community to use it as an assault weapon to break into the fortress is even more untrustworthy. But considering the degree of Zapatero’s alliance with Morocco, this meddling is not completelly unexpected.
(I’m sorry for not posting, but the spring, the flowers and me are not the best of friends ).
Morocco has cut diplomatic links with Iran, the Moroccan Foreign Ministry said on Friday, in the wake of an outcry in the Sunni Muslim world over a statement by an Iranian official questioning Sunni Bahrain’s sovereignty.
Rabat also criticised Iran for its efforts to spread its Shi’ite brand of Islam in Morocco, a move the ministry said it saw as threat to the North African country’s moderate Sunni religious identity.
“The Kingdom of Morocco has decided to break its diplomatic relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran beginning this Friday,” the ministry said.
Sunni scholars in Morocco and elsewhere have denounced what they see as Iran’s efforts to convert Sunni Muslims to Shi’ism, arguing the drive would create strife similar to the often bloody Shi’ite-Sunni divides in Iraq and Pakistan.
According to media reports, Ali Akbar Nateq-Nouri, an adviser to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said last month Shi’ite-ruled Iran had sovereignty over Bahrain.
In response Morocco’s King Mohammed sent the Bahraini monarch, King Hamad Bin Isa al-Khalifa, a message of support, calling the Iranian remarks “absurd” and a contradiction of international law.
The reason for this is that inside Morocco, there are shia muslims (most of them living in the North and East parts of the country) who, in an important part, had studied in Lebanon, are supporters of Hizbullah and “don’t act secretly as before” says Ahmed Abadi, an Islam’s teacher. “They even publish magazines where they say that Morocco is a country with a Shia past and it has to go bacj to its origins”.
So Shiites are trying to end Mohammed’s regime, eh?
Why not claiming too that Morocco’s own remarks about Ceuta and Melilla are too “absurd” and a contradiction of international law?
The International Criminal Court (ICC) has ordered the arrest of Omar al-Bashir, the Sudanese president, on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
The issuing of the arrest warrant was announced at a news conference at the home of the court in The Hague in the Netherlands on Wednesday afternoon.
The president has refused to acknowledge the authority of the court and, ahead of the announcement, he told reporters that any attempt to prosecute him would have “no value”.
Sudan’s ruling party has said that it plans a “million man march” in the capital, Khartoum, on Thursday to protest against the warrant.
CNN reported yesterday an statement of a Sudanese soldier, conscripted forcefully, who says:
“They ordered us to kill, to rape children. If we didn’t do it or tried to escape, we had some others who were ordered to shoot us. In my case, I didn’t actually rape them, as there was no penetration, I wasn’t able to. So I only was there during 15 minutos to make everybody think I was raping her. I have nightmares”.
5-year-old children were raped and in several refugee camps 20 children were born monthly as a result of the rapes.
The journalist adds that:
Time and again, though, it seems telling the world their stories has little tangible impact on their reality of their lives.
Will this arrest order have some “tangible impact” on their lives? It’s possible that it won’t. China has already critisized the decision and Al-Bashir has actually danced before the people gathered there to protest for this new form of colonialism which only “has the intention of desestabilizing the country”, as he has called the arrest order.
Today some NGOs expelled 10 NGOs of a country (recently they also expelled a journalist after she asked some questions about the weapons’ industry), in which around 2.2 million people can die of several illnesses and hunger as a direct consequence of this expulsion. The reason is that those NGOs were the purveyors of medical and humanitarian asistence (food, water, etc) needed in the area.
It’s just the same blackmail as ever: in the end, it’s the population which is going to suffer. A population who has suffered sufficiently bad. Among other causes, we can safely name the islamism of the Khartoum’s Government and also the Darfur’s oil reserves which of course, wouldn’t be sudanese if Darfur was independent.
Zapatero was at the press conference with Medvedev during the latter’s official visit to Spain. He was asked about about the relationship between Spain and Russia, specially regarding tourism. He said that this agreement was necessary because of the number of Spanish tourists who go to Russia, this year 500.000. And that the agreement was to “encourage, to asist, to fuck… ehh, to support that tourism“.
President Obama sent a secret letter to Russia’s president last month suggesting that he would back off deploying a new missile defense system in Eastern Europe if Moscow would help stop Iran from developing long-range weapons, American officials said Monday.
The letter to President Dmitri A. Medvedev was hand-delivered in Moscow by top administration officials three weeks ago. It said the United States would not need to proceed with the interceptor system, which has been vehemently opposed by Russia since it was proposed by the Bush administration, if Iran halted any efforts to build nuclear warheads and ballistic missiles.
He sent that without firstly asking US Senate about the terms of the letter. And in secrecy. This is purely Hope and Change!!!
UPDATE: Looks like Medvedev has said there was nothing concrete in the letter.
The letter contained an assessment of the situation, but there were no concrete proposals about any mutually binding decisions,” Natalya Timakova, Medvedev’s spokewoman, told reporters during a visit by Medvedev to Spain.
Well, that’s something… funny: what about the intention? Obama answered a letter without reporting about its content to the Senate in a so important and delicate matter. He answered it secretly, with a deal: I give you this and you give that. Isn’t that concrete enough??
With these facts in mind, the Obama Administration quid pro quo raises some troubling issues:
First, what the U.S. wants for not deploying systems to protect us is Russian diplomacy that ensures the Iranian ballistic missile and nuclear programs are terminated. That could take years and then it could only be verified with inspectors on the ground in Iran–an unthinkable concession. In the interim, Iran could easily build and test and we would have no defense. Indeed, not building defenses now may encourage the Iranians to speed-up their program. That’s a bad deal.
Finally, if hitting the “reset” button on US-Russian relations mean the United States has to make itself intentionally vulnerable to a potential Iranian threat–that’s a really bad deal.
Both Zapatero and Medvedev want Spain and Russia to be strategic partners (well, we can say safely that Putin wants it too) in several areas such as energy (which would mean Spain would buy their energy, as it looks like that Russia has a special plan to monopolise the access of energy to Europe), tourism (more Russian mobsters undoubtedly: the South of Spain, specially Málaga is full of them), infrastructures and transports.
The official meeting between Medvedev and Zapatero will take place tomorrow in Moncloa’s Palace (Official residence of the Spanish PM), where they are going to sign an “Statement of strategic association”. They will also analyse measures to fight economic crisis, possibilities of commercial relations and other bilateral matters, international political situation, energetic situation, UN reform, relationship between NATO and Russia and also between the latter and EU, regarding the next Spanish presidency.
It’s not Spanish King Juan Carlos the only person who asks Chávez to shut up. Now his doctors (via Twitter) have told him the same, though for other reasons. He says that it’s because of “the permanent use of the cannon I have here”.
And in good time, because after winning the referendum, he feels more secure and has ordered the invasion of the rice plantations because some business are ignoring price regulations imposed by the Government (what a photo! ).
He has also menaced US President Obama, cautioning the latter against “messing with him”. The reason? Obama accused him of not fighting against drug trafficking. Chávez has answered that there is only one country that is supporting drug trafficking, and that’s USA, whose President is Obama “although I doubt Obama governs at all”, he has added.
An international tribunal set up to put on trial the suspected killers of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik al-Hariri is to hold its first session this Sunday in The Hague. The Special Tribunal for Lebanon is opening its doors four years after al-Hariri and 22 others were killed in a suicide truck bombing in Beirut. It’s still not clear who will be indicted in connection with the assassination, but four pro-Syria generals are being held in custody in Lebanon. Canadian prosecutor Daniel Bellemare will have 60 days from the opening of the tribunal to request the transfer of suspects and evidence from Lebanon. Syria has denied accusations that it might have been behind the murder.
It is curious they don’t mention at all Hizbullah’s being a part of Lebanese Government, something which is surely as bad for Lebanon as being under Syrian tutelage.
Blacksmith of Lebanon has the photo of the four generals arrested in connection with Hariri’s murder and also this article about the terrorist attack:
Assad never believed there would be a UN inquiry into Hariri’s murder and it was only after I revealed in the Independent that there would be, that an astonished President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt rushed to his presidential jet and flew to Syria to warn Assad that he might be in very hot water indeed. The first UN team was led by Irish Deputy Garda Commissioner Peter Fitzgerald, who discovered that the wreckage of Hariri’s six-car motorcade had ? incredibly ? been moved from the crime scene at midnight on the day of the killings and other materials not associated with the bomb placed in the massive crater. The man responsible for doing so was General Ali al-Hajj, director general of the (then Syrian-dominated) Lebanese Internal Security Forces and one of the four men now locked up in Roumieh awaiting his day in court. If there is a court.
Al-Hajj used to work for Hariri, as his bodyguard, but was removed from his personal retinue when Hariri discovered he was also working for Syrian intelligence. He actually ‘ had the nerve to turn up at the Hariri family palace in Beirut’s Koreitem district to offer his condolences on the day of the murder.
You also can read this post about the International Tribunal in charge of the process:
“Funding is important, but international support for the Special Tribunal is also important,” he said. “There will be additional needs in coming years. The UN Secretary General is attempting to secure support from other countries, and we secured a majority of the funds necessary for the first year. I received a warm welcome and aid from many member states of the UN.”
I hope they are not blackmailed with the budget. Or forbidden to say who killed Hariri to maintain “regional stability”, stability that doesn’t exist really in the area. And the lack of condemnation of the people who ordered the killing will only make them stronger:
Eight months later, a report to the UN about Hariri’s assassination outlined a conspiracy of remarkable breadth and complexity. It revealed that three months before Hariri’s death, his security detail had been mysteriously reduced from 40 to eight; that six anonymously purchased mobile phones were used on the day of the attack to keep the bomber informed of Hariri’s movements and to provide intelligence on the three possible routes that Hariri could take from the parliament building to his home; that the suicide truck moved into position one minute and 49 seconds before Hariri’s convoy passed by; and that the truck itself had been stolen on October 12, 2004, in Sagamihara City, Japan. The killers appeared to be sophisticated, politically connected, and well-funded: clearly this was not the work of a lone extremist or a fringe group. It bore the hallmarks of a government-sponsored assassination.
(…) The ramifications of the Hariri case will extend well beyond justice and jail sentences. Many observers believe that the commission has been building a case against the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad, and his inner circle. Depending on how high up the charges go, the tribunal could have a major impact on the geostrategic map of the Middle East. An indictment of members of the Assad family and their closest allies, all members of Syria’s minority Alawite sect, could scuttle negotiations for a comprehensive peace deal between Syria and Israel. It could drive Assad further into the arms of Iran. It could even lead to a palace coup, or stir the country’s disenfranchised Sunni majority to revolt. “Imagine if the Syrian regime is proved to have planned and executed this assassination,” one Western diplomat with long experience in the region told me. “What will the Sunni majority in Syria think about a leadership that took out one of the major Sunni leaders of the Middle East?”
(…) Paul Salem, the director of the Carnegie Middle East Center, a Beirut-based think tank, went further: “Israel and the United States are not eager to see this regime collapse,” he told me from Qatar in mid-September. “They are afraid of the consequences.”
(…) As tensions between Syria and the U.S. increased, Hariri—along with Walid Jumblatt, the Lebanese Druze chieftain and one of Lebanon’s most powerful figures—allied himself with France and the United States, gambling successfully that the West would turn sharply against the Syrian regime and enable Lebanon to make a break. The Security Council resolution demanding Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon was an enormous blow to Assad. In Damascus, members of Assad’s inner circle began to worry not only about Hariri’s new course for Lebanon but about his reach inside Syria itself. “These guys saw Hariri as an immensely rich and powerful Sunni, and it exacerbated the paranoia of the minority regime,” says Nicholas Blanford, a Beirut-based British journalist and the author of Killing Mr. Lebanon, a book about Hariri’s murder.
The results on the poll on Geert Wilders (Do you agree with the English decision of declaring Wilders “persona non grata”?) are:
A total and absolute error: freedom of speech must be preserved 94% (15 votes).
While I think that freedom of speech is important, I believe that religious sensitivities must be respected 6% (1 votes)
Who is Geert Wilders? 0% (0 votes)
This week poll is about the agreement between the Talibans and the Pakistani Government in Swat’s valley. Fareed Zakaria discusses it and says that while the Talibans are “bad guys”, we don’t have to worry about them as they don’t want to achieve the Global Caliphate:
The groups that advocate these policies are ugly, reactionary forces that will stunt their countries and bring dishonor to their religion. But not all these Islamists advocate global jihad, host terrorists, or launch operations against the outside world — in fact, most do not. Consider, for example, the most difficult example, the Taliban. The Taliban have done all kinds of terrible things in Afghanistan. But so far, no Afghan Taliban has participated at any significant level in a global terrorist attack over the last ten years–including 9/11. There are certainly elements of the Taliban that are closely associated with Al Qaeda. But the Taliban is large and many factions have little connection to Osama bin Laden. Most Taliban want Islamic rule locally, not violent jihad globally.
This fortnight’s poll: priorities in the fight against Islamism
Fareed Zakaria says we don't have to be very worried by the Talibans as they don't advocate Global Jihad. Do you agree? Vote in this fortnight's poll!!
Bookmark/share a post
There is something to consider,though: the growing number of Moroccan nationals in Spain (after Hispanic-American, they are the main immigrant group in Spain) makes this reaaaaaaaaally interesting for Morocco, who already wants Ceuta, Melilla and the Canary Islands in a expansionist policy, seen always not very disgustedly by France, a traditional Moroccan ally, and by UK, because of Gibraltar (of course, Spain does not have one thousand million Chinese menacing Hong Kong, does it? In that case, the results would have been truly different 
).
Entries (RSS)