A U.N. resolution seeks to criminalize opinions that differ with the Islamic faith.

[S.A.M.]

Actions speak louder than words.

 

[copernicus66]

No matter what else is said about Islam, one thing is crystal clear: One of it's major goals, according to it's "laws" and teachings. is to DESTROY all other religions AND all people who do not accept Islam as the supreme all-in-all.

And still many idiots have the gall to call it a "religion of peace!" Just how absurd and self-contradictory can anyone be??????

Makes your skin crawl, doesn't it?

 

[spidergoat]

Actions speak louder than words.

You are free to play holier-than-thou because all of Islam's conquering and empire building happened before the modern era.

 

[S.A.M.]

That explains why they don't count the dead.

"We don't do body counts"

Its because illusion > reality

You are free to play holier-than-thou because all of Islam's conquering and empire building happened before the modern era.

Islam's "conquering and empire building" has left natives in their own lands, not governed by white men who put them on reservations.

happened before the modern era

so much for the "modern era"

 

[spidergoat]

That is not what's happening in Darfur where native Africans are being killed, displaced, and their women raped by Arab Islamic invaders.

 

[S.A.M.]

That is not what's happening in Darfur where native Africans are being killed, displaced, and their women raped by Arab Islamic invaders.

Have you seen those Arab Islamic invaders?

The Janjaweed

Another picture:

 

[spidergoat]

Almost half a million Hindus were ethnically cleansed from Kashmir by Muslim terrorists from Pakistan.

 

[spidergoat]

Have you seen those Arab Islamic invaders?

The Janjaweed

Your point?

 

[S.A.M.]

Yeah, the Mujahideen, who also killed their muslim brethren thanks to the arms and dollars they were rolling in.

Almost half a million Hindus were ethnically cleansed from Kashmir by Muslim terrorists from Pakistan.

Your point?

They are as Arab as Tzipi Livni is Middle Eastern.

the Janjaweed comprised nomadic Arabic-speaking African tribes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janjaweed

 

[quadraphonics]

Ah yes, treating people with civility. An outdated notion indeed.

Legislating civility is a radical (and radically bad) notion.

Have you read the text of the UN resolution?

Have you? Do you have an actual disagreement with anything Hitchens said, or are you just dismissing his position out-of-hand because he is an outspoken atheist?

 

[S.A.M.]

Legislating civility is a radical (and radically bad) notion.

You're kidding me. Its the foreign policy of the United States.

Have you? Do you have an actual disagreement with anything Hitchens said, or are you just dismissing his position out-of-hand because he is an outspoken atheist?

I've yet to find anything he says that I agree with, except his change of stance on waterboarding after being subjected to it. Fundamentalists on both sides of the equation are equally tedious.

 

[spidergoat]

Yeah, the Mujahideen, who also killed their muslim brethren thanks to the arms and dollars they were rolling in.






They are as Arab as Tzipi Livni is Middle Eastern.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janjaweed

Then leave out the Arab part, they are Muslims and my argument still stands.

 

[S.A.M.]

Then leave out the Arab part, they are Muslims and my argument still stands.

Thats fine, because it has nothing to do with my claim. An African who thinks he is Arab is no different from a Russian who thinks he is Middle Eastern.

But it has nothing to do with religion:

In the past, they were at odds with Darfur's sedentary population over natural grazing grounds and farmland, as rainfall dwindled and water became scarce. They are currently in conflict with Darfur rebel groups — the Sudan Liberation Movement and the Justice and Equality Movement. Since 2003 they have been one of the main players in the Darfur conflict, which has pitted the largely nomadic tribes against the sedentary population of the region in a battle over resource and land allocation.[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janjaweed

 

[quadraphonics]

You're kidding me. Its the foreign policy of the United States.

What in the fuck are you talking about?

But even supposing you had some kind of coherent point there, shouldn't it follow that you think that legislating civility is a bad idea?

Which would put you in basic agreement with Hitchens on this issue :]

I've yet to find anything he says that I agree with, except his change of stance on waterboarding after being subjected to it.

Then you probably haven't read enough of his writings. And you should, even if you disagree with him: he's a good enough writer to be worth reading regardless.

Fundamentalists on both sides of the equation are equally tedious.

Hitchens isn't a fundamentalist, nor is he tedious.

Not that you have much room to criticize people for tedium or fundamentalism.

 

[S.A.M.]

What in the fuck are you talking about?

But even supposing you had some kind of coherent point there, shouldn't it follow that you think that legislating civility is a bad idea?

Which would put you in basic agreement with Hitchens on this issue :]

More to the point, we should wait until someone has actually suggested legislating civility before getting an aneurysm.

Then you probably haven't read enough of his writings. And you should, even if you disagree with him: he's a good enough writer to be worth reading regardless.



Hitchens isn't a fundamentalist, nor is he tedious.

Not that you have much room to criticize people for tedium or fundamentalism.

I find the distance between reality and his perception of it too great for my consumption.

Unlike waterboarding, its not possible to pour his ridiculous assertions on his face before he realises how utterly clueless he is.

What do you disagree with?

The Commission adopted by a roll-call vote a resolution on combating defamation of religions (E/CN.4/2004/L.5) by 29 in favour, 16 against, with 7 abstentions, by which it welcomed the report of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism entitled “Situation of Muslim and Arab peoples in various parts of the world”; expressed deep concern at negative stereotyping of religions and manifestations of intolerance in some regions of the world; urged States to ensure equal access to education for all in law and in practice; expressed deep concern that Islam was frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism; noted 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; and expressed deep concern at programmes and agendas pursued by extremist organizations and groups aimed at the defamation of religions, in particular when supported by governments.

The Commission also urged all States, in conformity with international human rights instruments, to take all appropriate measures to combat hatred, discrimination, intolerance, and acts of violence motivated by religious intolerance; urged all States to ensure that all public officials in the course of their official duties respected different religions and did not discriminate on grounds of religion; strongly deplored physical attacks and assaults on businesses, cultural centres and places of worship of all religions; called upon the international community to initiate a global dialogue to promote a culture of tolerance based on respect for religious diversity; called upon the High Commissioner for Human Rights to promote and include human rights aspects in the Dialogue among Civilizations; and requested the Special Rapporteur to examine the situation of Muslim and Arab peoples in various parts of the world with special reference to physical assaults and attacks against their places of worship, cultural centres, businesses and properties in the aftermath of the events of 11 September 2001 and to submit a progress report on his findings to the Commission at its sixty-first session.

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2004/hrcn1082.doc.htm

 

[quadraphonics]

More to the point, we should wait until someone has actually suggested legislating civility before getting an aneurysm.

That is exactly what this Resolution attempts to do.

I find the distance between reality and his perception of it too great for my consumption.

Or rather, the difference between your perception and his. Or are we to accept that your perception is somehow more valid?

What do you disagree with?

The really objectionable parts are not in the two-paragraph summary you posted, but the actual resolution itself, which is available at http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/pdfid/47da45112.pdf. Specifically, in section 10:

"Emphasizes that everyone has the right to hold opinions without interference and the right to freedom of expression, and that the exercise of these rights carries with it special duties and responsibilities and may therefore be subject
to limitations as are provided for by law and are necessary for respect of the rights or reputations of others, protection of national security or of public order, public health or morals and respect for religions and beliefs;"

 

[S.A.M.]

That is exactly what this Resolution attempts to do.

Really? A non-binding resolution?

Or rather, the difference between your perception and his. Or are we to accept that your perception is somehow more valid?

Yeah, I'm the one who is told that I cannot buy an apartment in such and such place because I'm a Muslim, I'm the one who is marked for security check ups because I have a Muslim name, I'm the one who has to read and defend against crap about Muslims. So yeah, I'd say I know more about what the resolution addresses.

The really objectionable parts are not in the two-paragraph summary you posted, but the actual resolution itself, which is available at http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/pdfid/47da45112.pdf. Specifically, in section 10:

"Emphasizes that everyone has the right to hold opinions without interference and the right to freedom of expression, and that the exercise of these rights carries with it special duties and responsibilities and may therefore be subject to limitations as are provided for by law and are necessary for respect of the rights or reputations of others, protection of national security or of public order, public health or morals and respect for religions and beliefs;"

Yeah, like discriminating against atheist children in schools, atheists buying houses in the neighborhood, atheists joining groups, getting an education, getting employment. Would you object to a law against that? Well, I would not object to a law that made it impossible for someone to keep me from buying a house because I'm a Muslim.

The fact that such a law may be needed is a pity, but its a statement of the times I live in that I consider it relevant and I would like to hold people accountable through the law if necessary.

 

[spidergoat]

Descrimination against Muslims is always wrong, but that isn't the point of this resolution, which seeks to defend not people, but ideas.

 

[S.A.M.]

Yeah, unfortunately the rampant racism against Muslims is an issue I live with daily. As you say, its a matter of survival. Its alright to encourage the expression of racism, but not when active lynching is in progress.

 

[Baron Max]

Yeah, unfortunately the rampant racism against Muslims is an issue I live with daily.

What?! In India? The land of milk and honey? The land where everything is love, love, love? Surely there's not racism against anyone in India, the world's land o' milk n' honey?! Please, SAM, say it ain't so!

Baron Max