Pages

Saturday, September 07, 2013

The kiss of death








This is what Klevius wrote about this woman

Sunday, October 07, 2012

Kate Rudd, Sayeeda Warsi, Catherine Ashton, all work for Ansar Al-Shariah and OIC

There are 193 states represented in UN. Why are 57 of the worst Human Rights violators (OIC) allowed to dictate it and the world?!

 When Piers Morgan asked Iran's president if he was prepared to accept Israel's right to exist Ahmedinejad referred to the "end of occupation first" and by this he of course also referred to his previous answer where he saw the establishment of Israel in the first place as an "occupation". However, Piers Morgan never pointed out this. Wonder why?

Three UK women working hard from top positions for Sharia and against girls'/women's Human Rights



1 Kate Rudd, the British Consul General in Jeddah, started her diplomatic career as head of the UK Trade and Investment delegation to Iraq and her questionable position has only deepened as the delegation’s representative to OIC.

2 European Union's high representative for foreign affairs, Catherine Ashton (see text below).

3 Sayeeda Warsi ('Minister for Faith islam' – is at the Foreign Office and includes being the lead minister responsible for Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Central Asia, the UN, the International Criminal Court and the OIC, which is the largest multi-lateral organisation in the world after the UN)

 

Cliff Kincaid on The Wall Street Journal repeats what Klevius has warned for a decade:
OIC has not given up its efforts to silence criticism of Islam. The group has merely changed tactics, focusing instead on dramatically expanding the U.N. ban against advocating religious hatred. The legal basis here is the U.N.'s International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which prohibits "any advocacy of . . . religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination [or] hostility." Several Western states also bar such incitement. The OIC's attempt to broaden existing hate-speech laws is therefore difficult to resist on principle for those liberal democracies, which have bought into the idea that tolerance can be fostered through limiting free speech. This agenda was vividly on display in a statement by the foreign ministers of the OIC at the U.N. General Assembly last week. The statement, in response to the "Innocence of Muslims" film and cartoons depicting Muhammad published by a French magazine, refers to the U.S.-brokered Human Rights Council resolution. It then urges U.N. member states, "in line with their obligations under international human rights law, to take all appropriate measures including necessary legislation against these acts that lead to incitement to hatred, discrimination and violence against persons based on their religion."

Astonishingly, the European Union's high representative for foreign affairs, Catherine Ashton, has also issued a joint statement with the secretaries general of the OIC and the Arab League that "condemn[s] any advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to hostility and violence. While fully recognizing freedom of expression, we believe in the importance of respecting all prophets." The statement will be understood by many as EU approval of the OIC position that disrespecting any prophet is tantamount to advocacy of religious hatred and should be prohibited by states that have ratified the ICCPR




Baroness Cox: "It is right, of course, that we respect freedom of religion, but surely not when basic laws and morality are being flouted..." 


Klevius comment: Baroness Cox here reveals her "islamophobia" and could be jailed for it now in any of OIC's member states, and soon even in UK if Sayeeda Warsi & Co are allowed to continue their evil Human Rightsphobia. Sharia is "basic laws and morality" that deeply clashes with Human Rights. So deeply, in fact, that OIC (islam's foremost representative) has openly violated Human Rights by replacing with the terms "as would not be contrary to the principles of the Shari'ah"; "according to the norms of Islamic Shari'ah"; "in accordance with the provisions of Shari'ah"; "All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari'ah"; "to assume public office in accordance with the provisions of Shari'ah" "The Islamic Shari'ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration".


Some examples from OIC's Cairo declaration: 


ARTICLE 22: (a) Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the Shari'ah. (b) Everyone shall have the right to advocate what is right, and propagate what is good, and warn against what is wrong and evil according to the norms of Islamic Shari'ah (c) Information is a vital necessity to society. It may not be exploited or misused in such a way as may violate sanctities and the dignity of Prophets, undermine moral and ethical values or disintegrate, corrupt or harm society or weaken its faith. (d) It is not permitted to arouse nationalistic or doctrinal hatred or to do anything that may be an incitement to any form or racial discrimination. ARTICLE 23: (b) Everyone shall have the right to participate, directly or indirectly in the administration of his country's public affairs. He shall also have the right to assume public office in accordance with the provisions of Shari'ah. ARTICLE 24: All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari'ah. ARTICLE 25: The Islamic Shari'ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration.

No comments:

Post a Comment