| |
Islamic States To Push At UN For US Free Speech Restriction Via Shariah Law
|
|
| |
 My fellow Americans, we must remember that whatever when we have involved ourselves in the United Nations, that same body can and will turn on us. With Barack Obama ripping the First Amendment, a part of the document he swore an oath to uphold and defend, at the UN today, there is no doubt that Americans will feel the backlash of the UN against free speech in the U.S. It appears that the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC), which is a 56 state group, will not seek to institute Shariah globally with a blasphemy law.
Al Arabiya News reports,
Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, secretary-general of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), said the international community should “come out of hiding from behind the excuse of freedom of expression”, a reference to Western arguments against a universal blasphemy law that the OIC has sought for over a decade.
He said the “deliberate, motivated and systematic abuse of this freedom” were a danger to global security and stability.
Separately, the Human Rights Commission of the OIC, which has 57 members and is based in Saudi Arabia, said “growing intolerance towards Muslims”, had to be checked and called for “an international code of conduct for media and social media to disallow the dissemination of incitement material”.
The Obama administration is definitely sympathetic to the United Nations free speech code. According to the Weekly Standard,
|
|
|
Top
|
| |
57 Top U.S. Muslim Groups Demanded Government-Wide 'Islamophobia purge' in Letter to White House
|
|
| |
 In an excellent article yesterday by Kerry Picket of the Washington Times on the influence of Muslim groups on changing the language used in national security documents and protocol (the whole article is worth the read), Picket reports that last October several dozen top US Muslim groups sent a letter to White House “Assassination Czar” John Brennan demanding that the Obama administration establish a task force with these same organizations to “purge” (their word) US government counter-terrorism training of views them deem offensive.
Picket states:
By 2011, Obama’s Counterterrorism and Deputy national security advisor John Brennan was urged by Muslim, Arab, and South Asian organizations to begin an “independent, effective investigation into the federal government’s training of its agents and other law enforcement” and institute a “purge” of any material that the undersigned organizations deemed unacceptable.
In an October 19, 2011 letter to Mr. Brennan, the groups criticize for anti- Muslim bias the FBI’s 2011 training manual, the books at the FBI library in FBI training academy in Quantico, Virginia, specific FBI trainers and analysts, and a report made by Army Command and General Staff at the Fort Leavenworth School of Advanced Military Studies.
The letter makes references to a September 2011 Wired Magazine piece by Spencer Ackerman. The letter was also sent to Attorney General Eric Holder, Department of Homeland Security Sec. Janet Napolitano, Sec. of Defense Leon Panetta, FBI Director Robert Mueller, National Security Advisor Tom Donilon, and Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough.
The letter is still posted on the website of Muslim Advocates.
The same day that letter was sent to the White House, a meeting was held at George Washington University between these same groups and top DOJ officials, including DOJ Civil Rights Division head Tom Perez.
According to a report on the meeting by Neil Munro of the Daily Caller, several Muslim group leaders called for creating criminal and civil penalties for anyone advocating positions they deem offensive:
The department’s “civil rights lawyers are top of the line — I say this with utter honesty — I know they can come up with a way” to redefine criticism as discrimination, said Sahar Aziz, a female, Egyptian-American lawyer.
“I’d be willing to give a shot at it,” said Aziz, who is a fellow at the Michigan-based Muslim advocacy group, the Institute for Social Policy & Understanding. [...]
Aziz, however, used her invitation to argue that Americans’ fear of Islamists’ bombs has evolved into racism towards dark-skinned men.
The word “Muslim,” she said, “has become racialized. … I don’t accept this formalistic cop-out that this is all about religion.”
Aziz did not offer any evidence for her claim, which she said justifies the use of Title VI anti-discrimination laws against institutions and individuals who argue that Islamic texts spur Islamic violence.
This legal redefinition, she said, would also “take [federal] money away from local police departments and fusion centers who are spying on all of us.” [...] Read more here.
|
|
|
Top
|
| |
Obama To UN: 'The Future Must Not Belong To Those Who Slander The Prophet Of Islam
|
|
| |
 Barack Obama addressed the United Nations today in New York City and as I informed you a couple of days ago he attacked the First Amendment’s affirmation of the right of free speech. well he did just that. In fact, he did it no less than at least six times.
Here’s just one of those incidents:
In every country, there are those who find different religious beliefs threatening; in every culture, those who love freedom for themselves must ask how much they are willing to tolerate freedom for others.
That is what we saw play out the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity.
The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.
Notice that last line. Many are making a lot out of the free speech issue, just as I have, but our First Amendment also guarantees the right to freedom of religion and in my faith, Christianity, we have the obligation to point out the falsehoods of other religions because we are commanded to “earnestly contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.” My opposition to others’ theology is not out of hate, though I am accused of it. Rather it is like a parent that speaks to a child to correct their thinking and instruct them rightly. Parents demonstrate love by doing so. However, it appears that Obama and the Muslims do not want to hear any opposition to Islam or to Mohammad.
To be fair, Obama did follow that line with, “Yet to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see when the image of Jesus Christ is desecrated, churches are destroyed, or the Holocaust is denied. Let us condemn incitement against Sufi Muslims, and Shiite pilgrims. It is time to heed the words of Gandhi: “Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit.” Together, we must work towards a world where we are strengthened by our differences, and not defined by them. That is what America embodies, and that is the vision we will support.”
The problem still exists though. While he tips the hat towards Christ, which Islam does, he does not say anything remotely close to “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” Rather he simply says that the desecration of the image of Jesus Christ must be condemned. As one that believes in the First and Second Commandment, I view images as idolatry, so I condemn the image long before I condemn “desecration.”
Furthermore, Obama was unwilling to cite the fact that those who attacked the U.S. embassies around the world, including the consulate in Libya are responsible for those attacks, not some video. In fact, I’d be willing to bet most of the people involved have never seen the “Innocence of Muslims.”
Obama ever even mentioned the word terrorism, yet his White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and National Counterterrorism Center Director Matthew Olson all called what happened in Benghazi “terrorist attacks.”
Read more here.
|
|
|
Top
|
NOTE: If someone forwarded this email to you and you would like to receive more like this, click HERE to Register. For more information about Tennessee Eagle Forum, go HERE.
|
Forward this email to a friend
| |
|
|
Senators to Clinton: Show us the ambassador’s cables
Two top senators on the Foreign Relations Committee don't want to wait for the State Department to do its own investigation into the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans including Ambassador Chris Stevens; they want Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to show them Stevens's diplomatic cables and other correspondence now.
"While we appreciate the sensitivities associated with this ongoing investigation, we must insist on more timely information regarding the attacks and the events leading up to the attacks," wrote Sens. Bob Corker (R-TN) and Johnny Isaakson (R-GA) in a letter to Clinton Tuesday.
They acknowledged that Clinton is in the process of setting up an Accountability Review Board, although its chairman former Deputy Secretary of State Thomas Pickering said Monday that the panel hasn't started it work yet. But the senators don't want to wait for the board to finish its report, which might not be transmitted to Congress until next spring.
"To that end, we request that you transmit to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee all communications between the U.S. Mission to Libya and the State Department relevant to the security situation in Benghazi in the period leading up to the attacks, including, but not limited to, cables sent from Ambassador Stevens," they wrote.
The senators noted that Libya officials have said they warned the U.S. government about rising threats in Benghazi just before the attacks and they referenced the CNN reports, culled at least partially from Stevens's personal diary, stating that the ambassador believed his life was in danger Read more here.
|
|
| |
|
|
Join Us On Facebook and Twitter
|
|
|
