The UN Human Rights Council. More “Newspeak”.

The UN has its own version of what global human rights should be. They are not afraid to let the rest of us know what they find acceptable or not and we are supposed to follow blindly along, nodding our heads in full agreement. One of the most valued organs within the UN is the Human Rights Council. They too have their version of what is right and wrong. On the 30th March 2007 the council adopted a resolution which reflects the recent moves by the EU to prevent the calling of islamic terrorists by the proper name. Islamic terrorists. Not content with the EU going dumb, they apparently want the rest of the world to follow suit. Here is the extract from that resolution:

HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL 30 March 2007

Action on Resolution on Combating Defamation of Religions.

In a resolution (A/HRC/4/L.12) on Combating defamation of religions, adopted by a vote of 24 in favour, 14 against, and nine abstentions, as orally amended, the Council expresses deep concern at attempts to identify Islam with terrorism, violence and human rights violations; notes with deep concern the intensification of the campaign of defamation of religions, and the ethnic and religious profiling of Muslim minorities, in the aftermath of the tragic events of 11 September 2001; urges States to take resolute action to prohibit the dissemination including through political institutions and organizations of racist and xenophobic ideas and material aimed at any religion or its followers that constitute incitement to racial and religious hatred, hostility or violence; also urges States to provide adequate protection against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions, to take all possible measures to promote tolerance and respect for all religions and their value systems and to complement legal systems with intellectual and moral strategies to combat religious hatred and intolerance; further urges all States to ensure that all public officials, including members of law enforcement bodies, the military, civil servants and educators, in the course of their official duties, respect different religions and beliefs and do not discriminate against persons on the grounds of their religion or belief, and that any necessary and appropriate education or training is provided; invites the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance to regularly report on all manifestations of defamation of religions and in particular on the serious implications of Islamophobia on the enjoyment of all rights; and requests the High Commissioner for Human Rights to report to the Human Rights Council on the implementation of this resolution at its sixth session.

Clearly, a bid to prevent the excercising of our right to freedom of speech. The UN seems to have a problem with calling a spade a spade. We are not allowed to combine the words “Islam” and “Terrorist”. A clear signal that there are things we must not say for fear of insulting the muslims. And since it is they, the muslims, that decide what is insulting and what isn’t, and that their level of tolerance is, as we know, very low indeed, this can only cause problems when the discussion comes round to terrorism. Indeed, it is an attempt to quash any discussion concerning islamism, the fascist pendant to Islam.

The voting was hardly surprising either.

In favour (24): Algeria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Gabon, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Pakistan, Philippines, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa, Sri Lanka and Tunisia.

Against (14): Canada, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Guatemala, Japan, Netherlands, Poland, Republic of Korea, Romania, Switzerland, Ukraine and United Kingdom.

Abstentions (9): Argentina, Brazil, Ecuador, Ghana, India, Nigeria, Peru, Uruguay and Zambia.

The “nay-sayers” are interesting. France, Great Britain, Netherlands. Three countries suffering under creeping Islamism. They are normally considered as being tolerant countries and they voted “No”? Is this a sign of beginning resistance to Islam?

That the muslim lands voted for the resolution is certainly no surprise. The surprise is that Russia, China and Cuba voted for it, having no real feelings for the muslim faith.
They are however totalitarian states. Any attempt at free speech in these countries is already a thing of the past, so this may only further their domestic interests.
Freedom of speech is the enemy of dictatorships.

And so, if for no other reason, we must fight this trend to the end. Terror in the name of Islam is Islamic terrorism. Jihad is a war against the west. The war is being carried out by Islamic terrorists. Islamofascists.

Let us vigourously defend our right to call things by the proper name and damn the UN Human Rights Council for its cowardice.

Link: Resolution text.