Berkenaan presiden SBY akan datang ke PBB untuk mengusulkan anti-
penistaan agama itu bermaksud penuh politisasi dunia Islam utk
menggebuk (dg atas nama PBB) orang yang berani mengkritik ajaran Islam.
SBY itu ibarat suruhan tuannya dari Arab Saudi untuk melakukan
suatu hal yang bisa menguntungkan dalam menjaga Islam dari se-
gala kritik dan tentu saja untuk kepentingan Arab.
Jadi bukan semata "penistaan". Dibawah ini ada satu artikel
yang nota bene menjelaskan apa itu yang ada dibalik batu.
The danger of the Istanbul process by Alexandre del Vall
The objective of my presentation is to explain the role plaid by the
Organization of the Islamic Cooperation, OIC, and its several attempts to try
to ban freedom of expression on Islam across the world. First, I will explain
what is the OIC and what are its goals; Secondly I will develop the killing
freedom-islamic concept of "defamation of religions" supported by OIC and
partly by the UN; Third I will finish with the "Istanbul process" and the
western reaction against OIC anti-freedom and theocratic agenda.
What is OIC and its goals?
OIC is one the most important intergovernemental organizations of the world.
It groups 57 muslim countries and aims to defend muslim interest and to develop
a political islamization all over the world.
Its main leaders are Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Koweit, Turkey, Egypt;
-The main goal of OCI are:
-first to Reislamize muslim countries and submit muslim regimes and populations
to Sharià. In this OIC global framework and theocratic strategy, I think that
the "Arab spring" was a huge success for OIC and islamist dictatures because
many secular regimes were removed and sharià progressed; That fore, I ALWAYS
say that the FISRT VICTIMS of Radical Islamism are Muslims, muslim normal
citizens, muslim freedom fighters, muslim whomens, muslims seculars, and muslim
minorities, often forgot by the West.
-second to Islamize the West, using muslim immigrants and avoiding their
integration to western-unbelievers rules". (what I call "volontier islamic
apartheid". That fore, the western alliance with sunni theocratic regimes such
as OIC leaders is for me a suicide alliance.
Though they are divided, the 4 main tendances of the OIC global Islamization
Agenda, that I describes in my books ("The Islamic Totalitarianism" 2002- and
"Why Christians are murdered in the world today, The new christianophobia"
2011 -, share OIC imperialist objectives to submit step by step the World:
Those 4 main Charià supporters and Theocratic groups who fight secular
democracies and open societies in the world are:
-Saudi-wahhabism-and salafisme (at the head of all main islamic sunni
organizations, NGO and Banks;
-Muslim Brotherhood (born in Egypt but powerfull in all arab countries)
-Turkish Milli Gorus Movement (a kind of Turkish-neo-ottoman-muslim
brotherhood) and its AKP-Erdogan's government in Ankara;
-Indo-pakistani sunnis (who support for instance Taliban, many radical and
terrorist groups over the world, and many intolerant and radical associations
in Europe)
The Islamic Declaration of Human Rights
-The first victory of OIC was the proclamation, in 1981, of the "Universal
Islamic Declaration of Human rights » aiming that Charià must prevail to
secular laws and to the Universal Human Rights Declaration of 1948.
-In 1990, the OIC adopted, In Cairo, a new « Universal Islamic Déclaration of
Human Rights in Islam ".
Its Preambule insist more clearly on the superiority of islamic law over civil
rights and freedom of expression.
Though those too Islamic Human Rights Declarations had not any binding effect,
this constituted a real victory for OIC because the UN legitimized this Charià
based Declarations.
The concept of "Defamation of religions" and islamophobia
The second step of the OIC plan has been implemented successfully inside of the
United Nations since 1999, when the OIC began to promote the concept of
`defamation of religions'.
This concept is a serious threat to our democratic values because it aims at
restricting freedom of speech as a way to "prevent intolerance" and religious
hatred.
It strangely compairs the right to criticize islam a religion to a racist
crime and to ethnic hatred or insult. Every body know and understand that
Religion is not a Race, but the strength and the efficiency of this confusion
made on purpose by islamist activist and their leftists allied is based on the
fact that any kind of critic against islam is penalized and targeted as
"racism", even in Europe.
The Role of Pakistan
Inside of the UN Human Right Council and the OIC, Pakistan has been the most
active promoter of freedom-killing resolutions and of the strange and dangerous
concept of "islamophobia".
In 1999, Pakistan presented to the HRC a resolution on "defamation of Islam,"
which was later adapted to include all religions ("defamation of religions").
But the texts adopted by the HRC clearly denounced only "Islamophobia", concept
created by Ayatollah Khomeiny in 1990 in order to justify a death sentence
against Salman Rushdie and after that to blame and crucify the so-called
"western islamophobes".
A MIRROR ACUSATION
Huge paradox: We can notice that the main supporters or "Defamation of
religion" are the most intolerant and christianophobic States of the World,
such as Saudi Arabia or Pakistan!
Those totalitarian fanatic regimes who kill "apostates" and persecute
christians and non-muslims are poorly placed to give moral lessons to
democracies!
For instance, let's remind that Pakistan's Penal Code condemns to death
blasphemy, blasphemers, "apostates" and non-Muslim minorities who "insult
islam" or are proselytes.
Pakistan is one of the world's most intolerant States towards Christian
minorities. In effect, let's remind that recently, former christian Pakistani
minister Shahbaz Bhatti was killed in March 2011 simply because he defended
Asia Bibi, a Christian sentenced to death for "blasphemy" just because she
dared to drink "muslim water" while she was working in the field with muslim
collegues who denounced her
Let's remember that just some weeks before, a
moderate and tolerant muslim politician, the former governer of Penjab, was
also killed just because he claimed the innocence of Asia Bibi and asked to
free her
The same "double standard" can be seen in the UN Human Rights Council,
(established in June 2006), which always condemns western "Islamophobia", but
always remains silent about the massacres committed NOWADAYS by radical
islamist groups or regimes against "pagans", "apostates", liberal muslims,
Christians or budhist-hinduists in Pakistan, Bengladesh, Tchad, Sudan, Nigeria,
Pakistan, or Egypt,
Indeed, the UN Human Rights Council, controlled by Islamic countries and their
"Red anti-West" allies in Middle East, Asia, Latin America and Africa (the
Non-Aligned group and what I called the "RED-BROWN-GREENS Alliance of Rogue
States"), has never dared to criminalize the Christianophobia
-Let's come back to the OIC freedom-killing decade plan:
However, in 2001, the former Commission of Human Rights adopted a resolution
against "Defamation of religions" and "islamophobia".
One of the objectives was to adopt an international resolution against
Islamophobia which would impose deterrent penalties on those who dare to
criticize islam or denounce islam legal charià violence.
- In december 2005, a very important "Resolution against the defamation of
religions" was held by Pakistan, before being presented among the UN General
Assembly,
-In March 2007, a non-binding resolution, that named Islam as the only religion
concerned, was accepted with a majority of 108 votes.
The text denounced the fact that, after September 11th, Islam was too often
associated with terrorism, violence and human rights violations.
We must underline this perverse strategy: instead of making a self critic and
fighting against the legal charià roots of islamo-terrorism, the OIC used the
September 11th's tragedy as a new pretext to make the West feel guilty by
accusing him to "crucify muslims" and by introducing a "clash of civilization".
It's also why the United Nations created the "Alliance of Civilizations" to
fight against what Samuel Huntington called the "clash of Civilization".
In fact, this so called "alliance of civilization" groups many anti-democratics
and islamic regimes such as Iran or Turkey, and the western democraties who
share a common "appeasement policy" and volontier dhimmitude toward the hostile
islamic and anti-western world. Strangely, the west fills guilty for this
"clash of civilization" attributed to American "neo-cons" and defensers of the
West, but the main responsables of it are the anti-democratic "Red Bown Green"
States who want to destroy universal human rights and open societies by blaming
the West for everything and by spreading a hatred ideology against European and
American civilization itself.
- On march 2008, in this "post Corld War" and anti-West framework, a new step,
much more serious, has been made when the higher body of the UN adopted this
OIC's Resolution.
The General Assembly declared to be deeply "hurt " by the defamation of
religion and Islam over the world and specifically in western democracies"
(pretexting that Irak and Afghanistan wars where "islamophobics" and
"genocides" against Muslims), but did not say a word in favour of Christians
genocides in south Soudan in the same period.
In the name of subversive conception of Tolerance, OIC requested that western
democracies introduce in their civil law a penalization of "islamophobia".
As said before us the great western thinker Sir Karl Popper, Tolerance has been
used by Intolerants to destroy the Tolerant societies in the name of
Tolerance..
-In 2009, 23 countries voted in favor of the Resolution.
-In 2010, another similar Resolution was adopted by the Human Rights Council.
(condemning the Swiss popular initiative banning the minarets).
-In June 2010, speaking on behalf of OIC, Pakistan demanded that the UN Human
Rights Council take strong action against "Islamophobia" in the West.
2011: First victory of the Freedom camp
Surprisingly, in June 2011, after many years of resistance against OIC concept
of "Defamation of religions" and thanks to people like David Littman and Roy
Brown) a Human Rights Council Committee decided to abandon the concept of
"defamation of religions".
This UN Committee was composed by 18 independent « high level » experts who
concluded that anti-blasphemy laws, such as those implemented in Egypt, Saudi
Arabia or Pakistan, are violating Human Rights.
The 16/18 Resolution of december 2011
But the "defamation of religion" and "islamophobia" concept were reformulated
by OIC and by others terms with a new Resolution (named "16/18"), presented in
the Human Right Council and adopted by consensus on 19 december 2011.
This 16/18 Resolution aimed the same killing-freedom objective, but indirectly,
by "fighting against intolerance, negative stereotyping, stigmatization,
discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against individuals because
of their religion or belief".
It did not use anymore the term « defamation of religions", but another
expression more astute : «bases of their religion or belief » which means in
fact exactly the same things.
This new formulation emphazises protection of people, and not anymore on the
religion it-self, as it had been rejected before.
-The "Istanbul Process" against Freedom of thinking and expression
After that, a new strategy to implement the "16/18 Resolution" was conceived by
Turkish OIC General Secretary Eshanoglu, who decided to held in Istanbul in
July 2011, an international meeting.
This new OIC "Istanbul Conference" aimed to ban any critics of religions and
islam under the pretext of fighting the "intolerance against religions".
Let me now mention the OIC text itself about this new strategy:
The Istanbul Brainstorming Session yielded new ideas towards promoting in a new
way the legality of the concept of "defamation of religions" in terms of the
existing Human Rights framework;
OIC text says: "we must create the necessary environment conducive to
"prohibition of defamation of religions and incitement to hatred, violence and
discrimination on religious grounds":
- "OIC has been consistent at emphasizing the importance of the limits to the
right to freedom of opinion and expression, in a structured multilateral
framework, and in the light of events like the burning of Quran according to
the "test of consequence".
What is the "Test of consequences"? ,
It's a very dangerous concept, because it makes guilty for islamic violence not
the muslim fanatics who kill blamemathors or anti-islam thinkers, but the
caricaturists or islamophobes themselves, such as Danish cartoons or Theo Van
Gogh: all those who "provocate" violent reaction of muslims by "hurting their
beliefs"..
The OIC text follows:
"We call for a global awareness on the dangerous implications (consequences) of
the rise of Islamophobia on world peace and security. We emphasize the need to
develop, at the UN, including the HRC, a legally binding institutional
instrument to promote respect for all religions and cultural values and prevent
intolerance, discrimination and the instigation of hatred against any group or
followers of any religion".
After the first Istanbul meeting, in december 2011, 12-14th, OIC met in
Washington the Obama Administration in order to convince american President
Barak Obama to adhere to this "Istanbul Process and to implement the 16/18
Resolution adopted on march 24 of 2011 in Geneva.
With an official Hillary Clinton verbal approval, the OIC scored a diplomatic
important coup.
Now, following the Obama Administration, the European Union now plans to host
the next Istanbul Process, scheduled for July 2012.
What about European Union? What can we do?
Firstly, Europe MUST SAY NO to any kind of limitation or penalization of the
right of criticizing any religion!
Even as a believer, I'll never support any law who limits the right of any one
to criticize my religion, because every one must be able to express his one
thinking on any ideology or religion.
We can and we Must block this process as it has been once blocked in 2010-2011.
This must be stopped by all democrats, freedom fighters, secular leaders, human
rights defenders, at the UN, the EU, etc.
I think that the Members of the European Parliament can play a very efficient
role by rejecting this freedom killing new step of the OIC plan.
Crucify the crucifiers! : the emergency of a new rethoric
Secondly, we must use the same efficient weapons as radical islamists, OIC
strategists and their politically correct allies "leftists" or "goodists".
How? By Being more involved in the "semantic" or "verbal fight". Because since
the beginning of the Humanity and since men speak, the one who controls the
words controls the minds by key-words. Because of the straights links between
brain and words, this "semantic war" leds to a "psychological war". That fore,
Leftists and Islamists are very efficients when their use what I call
"neuro-semantic weapons" that aims at making filling guilties their enemies by
crucifying, targeting them, and by presenting themselves as "victims", "good"
or "anti-fascists resistants"
We all know how this is fake and not true, but
their semantic war is efficient since the 1960'eas
and paralyse the old West
and Europe that feels gulty of its past and its present.
In this framework, we can counter this Islamist-Leftist offensive of penalizing
"islamophobia" and crucifying the "intolerant" or "fascist-racist" west by too
main counter-accusation (never justify, always accuse):
-1/first, though many of us are secular, non-christians, non-muslims, jews or
atheist, we must act with the same weapons as OIC by blaming islamic countries
for persecuting, killing, putting in jail, or genociding so many Christians,
non-muslim, liberal muslims-apostates, and show at the UN, the EU and all
international bodies, that OIC and muslim countries just blame western
islamophobia and penalise any critics of Islam in order to hide the fact that
they persecute their minorities. This Mirror accusation based on hidind their
christianophobie by accusing the west of being "islamophobic" aims to prevent
any non-muslim reaction toward the islamic OIC goal to conquer and islamize the
humanity;
Reverse their Reductio ad Hitlerum strategy
2/ second, we must use or "reverse" against our opponents what the important
german-american jewish philosopher Leo Strauss called in 1953 the "Reductio ad
Hitlerum". The Reductio ad Hitlerum consists in blaming, demonizing and
crucifying the other by accusing him of being "fascist, nazi", racist, or
"acting like Nazis, etc.
Against this Leftist-islamist permanent accusation, we should more often remind
the important alliance between Palestian movement, Muslim Brotherhood,
Muslim-Arab regimes and Nazis, neo-nazis, and "negationnists" since the 30eas
until now. We should remember that Muslim Brotherhood, former Egyptian
president Abdel Nasser, and many Islamist political parties such as Hamas
admired or still admire The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, the most important
arab-islamist leader who was a personal friend and ally of Hitler.
We must answer that Saudi Arabia, Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Irak, Pakistan,
Hezbollah, Hamas, and even "pro-western" Turkey are since the end of second
world war the main promoters of negationnist, nazi, anti-Semites publications,
doctrines and hatred ideas.
We must Show that when islamists or their leftists allies pro-Hamas and
pro-Hezbollah present themselves as "the New Jewish" persecuted by the "New
Nazi-Israelian State" and by their "Imperialist American Allies", they just
insult Jewish Holocaust, jewish memory and jewish history.
The conclusion and the reality is that Radical Islamism is the New Nazism, the
Third Totalitarianism, the New Global Fascism, the most efficient Hatred
System, the most terrible anti-Semite totalitarianism, the most Racist and
Imperialistic ideology. And the first victims of this Massive Destruction
Ideology are first muslims who live under threat and terror, second Christian
and non-muslim minorities.
On the contrary, anti-Jihad freedom fighters, Asia Bibi Supporters, anti-Sharià
fighters who want to free Muslims and non-Muslims who live under
islamo-totalitarian regimes are the Real new Resistant. They are not
anti-Muslims, but they are in favour of Open societies, Tolerance and they
fight any kind of new fascism and dictatorship, even if this New fascism hides
itself behind a Religion.
We must be Sure of ourselves. Open societies must now stop justifying
themselves. On the contrary, we must react and make them filling guilty. We
must request to their governments that they apologize for the genocides and the
crimes they are doing against so many Christians, "pagans", atheists,
"apostates", "blasphemors" in Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Irak, Egypt, Pakistan,
Sudan or Nigeria.
Alexandre del Valle est géopolitologue, auteur de nombreux articles et ouvrages
dont "Le Totalitarisme Islamiste" et "Le Dilemme Turc" parus aux éditions des
Syrtes.
------------------------------------
Post message: [email protected]
Subscribe : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : [email protected]
List owner : [email protected]
Homepage : http://proletar.8m.com/Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
