NEJ!

Dagens leder fra JP (uddrag, læs det hele her):

Forenede Nationers menneskerettighedsråd har med tilslutning fra Danmark godkendt et udkast til en tillægsprotokol, der giver borgerne ret til at klage til en FN-komite, hvis de mener, at staten har krænket deres økonomiske, sociale eller kulturelle rettigheder.

Det er alarmerende, og inden skandalen får lov til at rulle og vokse sig endnu større, må svaret være et rungende, fuldtonet NEJ!

Det kunne lige passe, at vi skulle have en komite bestående af repræsentanter for nogle af klodens blodigste og mest rigide diktaturer til at sidde og træffe afgørelse om, hvad der er ret og rimeligt i demokratiske stater.

I en sådan komite ville repræsentanter for demokratiske stater risikere at blive underkendt af repræsentanter for regimer, som stener kvinder, afhugger hænder og hoveder og hænger homoseksuelle i byggekraner, mens hoben som en grum anakronisme optager sceneriet med mobiltelefonkameraer.

Det ville være ganske utåleligt.

EU, islam og Tyrkiet

Tyrkisk flag

Fra PI (langt indlæg)

How do Islam and a full EU membersip of Turkey contribute to the European social model? By its own definition, from the inside point of view, the EU is a community of values, an area of freedom, security and law, as well as a unique peace project which is responsible for prosperity. Christian Western values are not explicitly stressed, although the moral sensitivity undoubtedly stems from a Christian viewpoint.

From the outside point of view, the EU remains an attractive location for investment, trade relations and work opportunities. A coveted source of financing for development aid projects. A place where human rights gain more attention than in many parts of the rest of the world. But it has no political power, it is not a “global player” on the world stage. Furthermore, it is lacking in the Common Foreign and Security Policy, CFSP.

Economic success coupled with weakness in foreign policy makes the EU – in the eyes of the rest of the world – a huge NGO and an object of desire for other political forces. The Islamization of Europe is at the forefront, followed by the Turkish claim of dominating Europe. This country is paving its way forward. Negotiations in the sense of “giving and taking” do not take place. Turkey wants a Turkish Europe!

Islam i Europa – fra en kapacitet på området

Nu er det for sent – Islam er og bliver her. Europa kan se frem til en rask lille balkanisering – men det er selvfølgelig vores egen skyld, vil de kulturradikale og historieløse blive ved med at påstå.

Via GoV

Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) Secretary-General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu has said Islam is not an extrinsic addition to, but a fundamental element of European culture.

On a recent visit to Helsinki at the invitation of Finnish President Tarja Halonen, Ihsanoglu gave a lecture titled “Islam in Europe.” Stressing that his aim in giving this lecture was to stop Islamophobia from becoming widespread in Europe, Ihsanoglu told the Cihan news agency: “We argue that Islam is among the founding elements of Europe. The Ottomans ruled for five centuries in the Balkans, and Muslim rule in Andalusia lasted eight centuries. Above all, 41 million Muslims live in Europe right now. So Islam cannot be regarded as an extrinsic element in Europe. It is one of the founding elements of the European civilization.”

Stressing that European civilization was built with many contributions from Muslim culture in terms of science, philosophy and humanistic values, Ihasanoglu said, “If we can share the idea that Islam is an essential element of Europe, Europe’s perception of Turkey’s EU membership would change.” Ihsanoglu said there is confusion about the place of Islam in Europe. “Islam has been in Europe for 14 centuries; it is not a foreigner in Europe,” he added.

Ihsanoglu also said it was not acceptable to equate those who engage in terrorism on behalf of Islam with Islam itself, adding: “Where do they get the authorization to commit terrorist acts under the name of Islam? Nobody has such a right, either in religion or in politics.”

Inden man svømmer helt hen i romantiske drømme om fredelig sameksistens mellem “tolerant” islam og kristendom i Spanien/Andalusien, bør man læse dette indlæg fra Dhimmi Watch af Bat Y’eor og Andrew G. Bostom.

Durban II: Islam prøver at fjerne menneskehedsrettighederne

I dagene fra den 20. til 24. april 2009 frygtes et flertal af landene i FN anført af Organisationen af Islamiske Lande (OIC) at rette et så ødelæggende anslag mod Menneskerettighedsdeklarationen, at den, hvis de måtte få held til deres forehavende, reelt vil miste sin værdi, og de Forenede Nationer de facto være frataget sin eksistensberettigelse.

Konferencen i Genève næste forår skal følge op på “Verdenskonferencen mod racisme, racediskrimination, fremmedhad og relateret intolerance” i 2001 arrangeret af FN’s Menneskerettighedsråd i den sydafrikanske havneby Durban, der er en skamplet på FN’s allerede ramponerede renommé, som det endnu ikke er lykkedes at viske bort.

USA og Israel udvandrede fra konferencen, der undervejs stemplede Israel som en apartheidstat, ligestillede zionisme med racisme samt nedtonede betydningen af det nazistiske folkemord på jøderne under Anden Verdenskrig.

Læs resten på JP

UN Rights Chief Knocks West for Threatening Walk-Out of ‘Durban II Racism’ Conference, Wins Praise from Islamic States

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: media1@unwatch.org / Tel: +41-79-332-8106

Geneva, Sept. 8, 2008 — After new UN rights chief Navanethem Pillay addressed the 47-nation Human Rights Council for the first time today, independent human rights organization UN Watch praised her “inspiring life example as an anti-apartheid advocate,” yet expressed deep concern over her remarks praising the UN’s preparations for a follow-up to the troubled 2001 Durban world conference on racism. Her defense of the Durban process was immediately hailed in the plenary by Pakistan on behalf of the Islamic states, Egypt for the African bloc, Cuba for the Non-Aligned, Russia and South Africa.

Without mentioning their names, Pillay criticized the current absence in the UN deliberations of Canada, the U.S. and Israel, as well as similar threats to walk out of the already controversial April 2009 conference made by the French, U.K. and Dutch governments.

“I do not believe that ‘all or nothing’ is the right approach to affirm one’s principles or to win an argument,” said Pillay. “Should differences be allowed to become pretexts for inaction, the hopes and aspirations of the many victims of intolerance would be dashed irreparably. For these reasons, I urge those governments that have expressed an intention not to participate to reconsider their position,” she said.

According to UN Watch, Pillay “is shooting in the wrong direction. Why is the high commissioner aiming her fire at the world’s most tolerant democracies, instead of at racist tyrants like Sudan’s Omar al-Bashir and Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who, under the chairmanship of Muammar Qaddafi’s Libya, have already begun to hijack the conference?,” asked UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer.

In her speech, Pillay praised the African states’ recent preparatory conference, held in Abuja, Nigeria on August 24-26, as “productive.”

“In fact,” said Neuer, “the Abuja conference utterly failed its stated mission, and was a major setback for the anti-racism cause and millions suffering around the globe. Its concluding declaration failed to say a word for the victims of Sudan’s atrocities in Darfur, or those other African governments perpetrating ethnic violence. Instead, it explicitly attacked free speech and singled out Israel — exactly what the UN’s highest officials promised Durban II wouldn’t do. The high commissioner ought to be taking on the hijackers of the anti-racism conference, instead of the few that seek to resist them.”

“We remind the high commissioner that in 2001, the most virulent and inciteful language of the Durban declaration was removed only under the pressure of European threats to walk out, as the U.S. and Israel did. So too now, the threat of Western non-participation remains the only force with the slightest chance of preventing the conference from degenerating into an out-and-out fiasco,” said Neuer.

An early draft of the April conference’s outcome document, released by a UN planning committee on Friday, reserves space to include provisions adopted by the African conference in Abuja. The Abuja text calls on states “to refrain from condoning incitement to racial and religious hatred and violence under the pretext of free speech” (par 13). It also expresses “concern about the plight of the Palestinian people under foreign occupations” (par. 32). The rest of the document focuses on Western practices today and in the past against people of African descent.

UN Watch is a non-governmental organization whose mandate is to monitor the performance of the United Nations by the yardstick of its own Charter. www.unwatch.org

UN’s “menneskerettighedsråd”

JP via Punditokraterne

FN’s menneskerettighedsråd (”Rådet”) har 28/3 afsluttet sin syvende ordinære session i Geneve.

Ligesom størstedelen af de øvrige ordinære og ekstraordinære sessioner bekræftede den syvende session, at rådet er en eklatant fiasko og værre end sin forgænger, Menneskerettighedskommissionen.

Endnu en gang fik organisation for den islamiske konference (OIC) gennemtrumfet en række resolutioner, der kritiserer og/eller fordømmer Israel, hvilket bringer antallet af rådets anti-israelske resolutioner og beslutninger op på 19 på under to år. Som det er kutyme for de anti-israelske resolutioner, nævner man ikke de terrorhandlinger, som f.eks. Hamas begår (både mod uskyldige israelere og palæstinensere), eller at Hamas end ikke anerkender Israels ret til at eksistere.

Denne fundamentale ubalance fik da også de vestlige lande til at stemme imod den af resolutionerne, der fordømmer Israels handlinger i Gaza, og til at undlade at stemme for en resolution vedrørende Golan. Men da de vestlige lande er i klart mindretal, kunne disse resolutioner gennemtrumfes alligevel.

Israel, men ikke Kina
Intet andet land end Israel er blevet fordømt af rådet, hvilket heller ikke blev tilfældet ved den syvende session. Kinas overgreb på civile i Tibet blev således ikke genstand for en resolution eller en uafhængig undersøgelse, på trods af at denne begivenhed kunne fortjene sin egen ekstraordinære session.