UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres Blames Terrorism On Islam's Critics!

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres Blames Terrorism On Islam's Critics!

I found this quote at Jihad Watch:

“One of the things that fuel terrorism is the expression in some parts of the world of Islamophobic feelings and Islamophobic policies and Islamophobic hate speeches,”

    Guterres was speaking at a presser in Saudi Arabia. He was shifting blame for terrorism onto Geert Wilders, President Trump and other critics of Islam.  As a critic of Islam, I do not accept his shit; I call him out and condemn his lie in the strongest possible terms: May Satan seize Guterres by the heart and drop with him into Hell!!

    Islamic terrorism is not driven by our objections or by propaganda. It is doctrine driven. Allah & Moe must be obeyed and  Moe must be emulated to gain admission to Allah's celestial orgy.  Allah commanded Muslims to "strike terror¹"  & "terrify²" and said he would and did "cast terror³". Moe said he was "made victorious with terror⁴".  Allah promises Brownie Points for acts of terrorism⁵.

    Islamic law is clear on the matter: Jihad  & terror are inflicted because we reject Islam, no other provocation is involved⁶.  One attack in every year is the mandatory minimum  and all who know of the obligation are sinners if it is neglected.  Jihad is taken on Islamic initiative, it is offensive, not defensive.

    The Secretary General and United Nazis are part of the problem, not part of the solution.. Each year they resolve⁷ that  terrorism must not be associated with Islam.  They continue to demand that criticism of Islam be outlawed.  It is time for the USA to withdraw from the UN and quit financing an imimical organization that operates against our interests To Hell with Islam and with the UN!.

strike terror

    Pickthall & Sher Ali  use "strike fear"  two lesser known translators use "strike terror" .  The Arabic word means to disperse: to scatter the prospective victims by the example of the defeated people. Moe was building a reputation for barbarian rapine to intimidate his intended victims.

    The Mariful Qur'an includes commentary that makes the matter clear: the intent is to terrorize others not yet attacked.

Tafsir In kathir conveys essentially the same message.

terrify

    Surah Al-Anfal  8.60 includes an explicit order to maximize military power for the purpose of terrifying enemies, known and unknown.  

    The practical application is shown in the commentary on 3.172 in Vol. 2,  page 251 of the Mariful Qur'an.

made victorious with terror

    Moe bragged about it!  These two sayings in Sahih Bukhari  say it all!  Moe was a terrorist!!

Terror promised & cast

    Surah Al-Imran 3.151 contains a promise which sanctifies terrorism. Surah al-Ahzab  33.26 connects casting terror with victory.

Brownie Points

    Surah At-Taubah 9.120  promises extra good deed credit for acts intended to injure or enrage us. On the last day, Alah wil weigh each Muslim's sins against his good deeds. The swing of the balance determines where he will spend eternity and how high or how deep he will go.  Bonus points could get him extra Christian sex slaves taken from the fire.

Shari'ah

   "Reliance Of The Traveller" O9.1 describes the communal and individual obligations to perform Jihad in every year.  The Book Of Jilad will clarify it for you.  

O9.1: The Obligatory Character of Jihad

Jihad is a communal obligation (def: c3.2).  When enough people perform it to successfully accomplish it, it is no longer obligatory upon others (O: the evidence for which is the Prophet's saying (Allah bless him and give him peace),

"He who provides the equipment for a soldier in jihad has himself performed jihad,"

and Allah Most High having said:

"Those of the believers who are unhurt but sit behind are not equal to those who fight in Allah's path with their property and lives. Allah has preferred those who fight with their property and lives a whole degree above those who sit behind. And to each, Allah has promised great good" (Koran 4:95).

If none of those concerned perform jihad, and it does not happen at all, then everyone who is aware that it is obligatory is guilty of sin, if there was a possibility of having performed it. In the time of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) jihad was a communal obligation after his emigration (hijra) to Medina. As for subsequent times, there are two possible states in respect to non-Muslims.

The first is when they are in their own countries, in which case jihad (def: o9.8) is a communal obligation, and this is what our author is speaking of when he says, "Jihad is a communal obligation," meaning upon the Muslims each year.

The second state is when non-Muslims invade a Muslim country or near to one, in which case jihad is personally obligatory (def: c3.2) upon the inhabitants of that country, who must repel the non-Muslims with whatever they can).

    The caliph makes war, provided he has first issued the invitation to Islam. This is proof of the offensive nature of Jihad.

O9.8: The Objectives of Jihad

The caliph (o25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o11.4) -which is the significance of their paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions) (O: and the war continues) until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the word of Allah Most High,

"Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and His messenger have forbidden-who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book-until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled" (Koran 9.29),

the time and place for which is before the final descent of Jesus (upon whom be peace).  After his final coming, nothing but Islam will be accepted from them, for taking the poll tax is only effective until Jesus' descent (upon him and our Prophet be peace), which is the divinely revealed law of Muhammad. The coming of Jesus does not entail a separate divinely revealed law, for he will rule by the law of Muhammad. As for the Prophet's saying (Allah bless him and give him peace),

"I am the last, there will be no prophet after me,"

this does not contradict the final coming of Jesus (upon whom be peace), since he will not rule according to the Evangel, but as a follower of our Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) ).

    The Book Of Jihad has Al-Shafi'i  in a more comprehensible format. Read it and curse Islam!!

    Hedaya is the fiqh of the Hanafi madhab; compare it to the Shafi'i school above.  The requirement of perpetual war is on page 140 of the second volume. Permission to attack infidels without provocation is on page 141.  Page 212 gives us important details about Jizya, which is a punishment for not being Muslim and a payment in lieu of destruction.  Page 216 tells us that disbelief is an evil which must be removed from the world by death or Islam.  Who can get a clue?  Can you??  Can President Trump???

    The real objective of Jihad is accrual of loot, recall what Moe said about his provision!  Muslims must usually engage in dawah for three days before attacking in order to make the suckers think its about religion.  

    Yes, the type face and vocabulary are archaic and the syntax is turgid but the information contained in these pages is a matter of life and death for civilization. Islam is a predatory way of life disguised as a religion. It must be exterminated. The Muslims present in Dar al-Harb must be expelled and further invasion terminated.  I choose life, will you?  If you choose life & liberty, then share this post to your favorite social media and tweet it to Presiident Trump.  

Hledaya 2.140 Annotated by Kab Ashraf on Scribd

Hedaya 2.141 Annotated by Kab Ashraf on Scribd

Resolution

What is the meaning of  "incitement to imminent violence" ?  Ban Ki-Moon, devil take him, told us implicitly: any and all expression critical of Islam!  

At the time of its publication, Ban Ki-moon described Fitna,  Geert Wilders' short documentary exposing the nexus between the Qur'an & terrorism as "hate speech" & "incitement".  It is the Qur'an, not Fitna which constitutes "hate speech" & "incitement" to hatred and violence.

"There is no justification for hate speech or incitement to violence," Ban said in a statement. "The right of free expression is not at stake here."

The previous Secretary General conflated exposure of incitement with incitement!  What an arrogant AssWhole!!!  How can we hope to mount an effective defense without naming the enemy and exposing its tactics & strategy?!  

    "Fitna" and "Innocence of Muslims" are neither hate speech nor incitement; the Qur'an, hadith & Islamic law are!!!

AssWholliness: United Nazis Experts Condemn Islamophobia

The United Nazi experts in genocide & discrimination are

“ are  sickened  by  blatant  manifestations  of  hatred  and  intolerance,  including  by  public figures  in  response  to  terrorist  attacks  by  violent  extremists,”.

  I refuse to be sickened, I will not waste a good bowl of bean soup on their self-righteous AssWholliness. I am revolted and I raise the impudent digit of contumacious defiance.

    Terrorist attacks, those who perpetrate them and the damnable doctrines which motivate them are and must remain objects of hatred, execration, condemnation & contempt.

    Tolerance and respect, like credit, are two way streets. "Credit is given where credit is due; we pay cash and so will you." applies to tolerance and respect.  Islam and Muslims give none and earn none. They are intolerant and unworthy of respect & tolerance.  

    Allah and his slaves curse us: 2.89, 9.30. No religion will be accepted but Islam 3.85. Muslims are the best of peoples, for the people, as they bring us to Islam with chains on our necks 3.110, Bukhari 6.60.80.

    "Including  by  public figures" is an obvious reference to presidential candidates: Dr. Ben Carson, Donald Trump & Senator Ted Cruz.  

    Dr. Carson rejected the idea of electing a Muslim to the presidency and with good reason. Islam is not compatible with our constitution.   Islam denies human rights, equality and dignity.  It demands imposition of corporal punishments. It demands execution of blasphemers and apostates. It denies freedom of religion.  

    Dr. Carson called for leaving Muslim refugees in their home region, where they belong.  While terrorists have masqueraded as refugees to get into Paris and slaughter innocent people. every Muslim is an existential threat to the extent that he believes in Allah, his imperatives, threat and promise.  Keeping them out is the right thing to do.

    Donald Trump called for a moratorium on Islamic immigration, and with good reason.  Islamic migrants are an enemy fifth column, not refugees. They come as parasites and conquerers, not to assimilate.  Its Hijra, stupid; what Moe did to Yatthrib.

    Senator Ted Cruz also wants to leave the Muslims in their home region. He also called for carpet bombing ISIS.  Both with good reason.  

    Phobia implies irrational fear. There is nothing irrational about fearing and hating  those Hellbent on  our destruction, commissioned by their deity to conquer and dominate the world.   Allah commands Muslims to "strike terror", "terrify thereby" and make a "great slaughter", killing and wounding "many of them". He cast terror, giving Muslims victory thereby.  Its in their canonical books, which have been translated into our language and uploaded to the web so we can read them. Carson, Cruz & trump should read them and get a clue.  They should call the enemy what it is: Islam, not "radical Islamic terrorism", which implies the existence of an anodyne and benevolent Islam which does not exist.  3:151, 8:12,39,57,60,65,67, 9:5,29,38, 39,111,120,123, 33:26,27, 47:4,49:15, 59:2,13, 61:10-13; Sahih Bukhari 1.7.331 & 4.52.220.

    Dr. Carson, Senator Cruz & Mr. Trump have a first amendment free speech clause right to criticize and condemn Islam. So do I, and I exercise it.   The founders knew that free speech is necessary to open debate in a representative republic. We must be at liberty to learn and share the truth about existential threats including but not limited to Islam.

    Its Islam, Stupid! Allah said "fight them" Islamic law says "The caliph makes war on Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians"... and "fights all other peoples until they become Muslims"... What the Hell part of that do you damned fools not comprehend???  

    Islamic law says that the minimum annual jihad requirement is one military expedition in every year but more is better.  It says that, if jihad is neglected in a year when it is possible, all who know of the obligation are in sin. The Book Of Jihad has Imam Al-Shafi'i's  infamous fiqh is more legible form. Reasonable, open mined men of good will read it and curse Islam.

    "Particularly  the  deliberate  and  dangerous  spread  of   misinformation  and  the  manipulation  of
people’s fears and concerns for political gain.”

   Shrub & Obamination lied for political gain. Shrub said "Islam is a great religion of peace.". He lied. Islam is permanent war. Obamination said "We are not at war with Islam." Islam is waging war against us and we need to reciprocate and exterminate it.

    Dr. Carson, Senator Cruz & Mr.  Trump lie about Islam by obfuscation: they do not state the fatal facts as I have done above.  There is no "violent extremism" or "radical Islam" there is only Islam, as Moe preached and practiced it in the 7^th century.

"The Special Advisers strongly and unreservedly condemn all criminal attacks by violent extremists, wherever they may take
place. They underline, however, the damaging effects of
linking such attacks to a specific population, based on its identity, as doing so has resulted in discrimination and targeting of Muslim population."

    "Violent extremists"  is an accursed lie. The attacks in Paris and San Bernardino were carried out by believing Muslims, not extremists. The words and works of the founder of Islam are  normative, not extreme. Moe set the standard; deliberately building a reputation for barbarian rapine by assassinations, pillage and genocide.

    Recent United Nazi resolutions  reaffirm "that terrorism cannot and should not be associated with any religion, nationality, civilization or ethnic group,".  Who but Muslims engage in Islamic terrorism?  When you hear hoof beats, do you expect the arrival of unicorns?  When you hear of a terrorist attack, do you  assume it was carried out by Christians?  

    Terrorism is linked to Islam by its canonical books.  The Qur'an has Allah saying that he would and did cast terror, resulting in victory over Jews. Moe said that he was made victorious with terror. What the Hell part of that is  beyond your intellectual capacity to comprehend?  

    Are Mafia members discriminated against when suspected of extortion and smuggling?  Neither are Muslims discriminated against by the sure knowledge that  members of their ummah perpetrated  a  mass killing.

    Muslims must be removed and excluded from Dar ul-Harb because each one of them is a potential terrorist, only awaiting the confluence of Iman and the call to jihad.  The MINO can become a Believer and join the jihad at any time, without warning.  

    Go to "The Book Of Jihad", linked above, and read about the fard of jihad. When we retaliated against Afghanistan, it converted from fard al-kifaya to fard al-ayn. The obligation to wage war against us is now individually binding on every Muslim wheresoever dispersed over the face of the earth.  Each Muslim is obligated to do whatever he can to injure  or enrage us; to punish us for not being Muslims.  Allowing the like of Syed  Farook to reside among us is suicidal  insanity.

"The Special Advisers recalled that any “advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to  discrimination, hostility or violence” is prohibited under international  human rights law and by the  national laws or constitutions of many countries."

    I call CamelShit! When Geert  Wilders published Fitna, Ban Ki-moon used that malignant language to condemn it as incitement to  hatred and violence. Arrogant AssWholes equate exposure of evil with evil.  Wilders simply shows you the Qur'an verses that incite hatred & violence  and the Imams who rouse the rabble by preaching them in their mosques.



ICERD, ICCPR & CPPCG require that Islam be proscribed by law for
violating human rights,  warmongering & inciting genocide, but  the Secretary General wants to ban Fitna instead.

Reuters quotes U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon about Fitna:"There is no justification for hate speech or incitement to violence," Ban said in a statement. "The right of free expression is not at stake here."

In  recent  weeks,  there  have  been  numerous  acts  of  intimidation  and  violence  against  Muslims and  Muslim  sites,  including  vandalism  of  mosques  as  well  as  discriminatory,  xenophobic  and racist statements.  Some  of  these statements  have  referred  to  all  Muslims - and  all refugees  and asylum seekers originating from Syria and Iraq - as “terrorists.”

    There is no excuse for unprovoked insult & assault against anyone, Muslim or not. There is no excuse for vandalism & arson.  Those are crimes. I neither advocate nor incite them.  If mentally unstable individuals commit such acts when outraged about Islamic terrorism, that is not the fault of those of us who expose it.  

    Islam is not a race. You can not change your race. Ayaan Hirsi Ali remains Black after apostatizing. Dougie Hooper remains White after reverting. Race is immaterial to the issue at hand. AssWholes play the race card as a tool for squelching debate.

    Islam began as an Arab Mafia but it conquered and subsumed Asians, Blacks and Caucasians. Its multi racial.  Exposing, condemning and objecting to Islam is not racist.  There is no element of bigotry or racism in fact based declarations that Muslims should not be admitted to America or elected to high office.

    Christian and Yazidi refugees from Iraq & Syria are not terrorists. Muslims are.  Muslims are obligated to obey Allah and emulate his Messenger.  Allah commanded them to "strike terror", "terrify" prospective enemies and "fight those of the disbelievers nearest you.  Moe was "made victorious with terror".  Muslims are told in 33.21, to emulate him. Obedient Muslims are terrorists. Islam entails terrorism. AssWholes, like LibTards and other analencephalopaths, can't comprehend that because they do not use their brains.

    Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, mastermind of the second WTC attack, said it best in his "Response To  The Nine Accusations".

Therefore, killing you and fighting you, destroying you and  terrorizing you, responding back to your attacks, are all considered to be great legitimate duty in our religion.

    What part of  terrorizing you is a great legitimate duty in Islam do you not comprehend?!

"Refugees from Syria and Iraq are fleeing precisely
the kind of violence that we in the West also fear. To turn
them away when they are seeking refuge is an affront to our common humanity.”

    The AssWholes played the guilt card. Two of the terrorists who attacked Paris were "Syrian refugees" .   That is ample cause for telling them to stay home.

"At this time when the world is facing complex challenges, including confronting extremist violent groups and individuals, Governments and other leading actors in society should publiclycounter lies, prejudice and fear”

    Islam is the violent group; the rest are subsets of Islam, undifferentiated from it in any significant way.  This blog post is countering lies & prejudice with facts.  Fear is a natural result of terrorism, both the end and the means  Muslims seek to impose.  That fear must motivate citizens to demand that Islam be outlawed and Muslims  expelled and excluded.

    Current immigration law permits exclusion of subversive and violent enemies. The  constitution is not a suicide pact. Freedom of religion does not extend to attacking, killing, enslaving, plundering, raping and enslaving non-believers, all of which are entailed by Islam. Where you find the right to perform such acts, there you will find the right to manifest, practice & propagate Islam; not in our constitution!

Condemning Advocacy Of Religious Hatred That Incites Violence

A/C.3/68/L.48 Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping,stigmatization, discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against persons, based on religion or belief continues by condemning advocacy of religious hatred that incites violence.

Condemns any advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to
discrimination, hostility or violence, whether it involves the use of print,
audiovisual or electronic media or any other means;

    The condemnation is highly abstract and so broad as to be devoid of meaning. Precisely what are they bitching about?  The United nations bitch about any and every criticism and exposure of the damnable doctrines & practices of Islam. Secretary General Ban Ki Moon has an example for you, please pay close attention. 

Reuters quotes U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon about Fitna:"There is no justification for or hate speech incitement to violence," Ban said in a statement. "The right of free expression is not at stake here."

Please watch the video, carefully noting the source of each and every incidence of hate speech and incitement. 

The following quotes and links provide ample documentation for the validity of the video's conceptual content.

Each of the above listed ayat is linked to ten parallel translations.

The text of the violent ayat in the list above: [Links to Ibn Kathir's Tafsir supplied when available.]

• 2:191 And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith. [Abdullah Yusuf Ali]
  • Righteousness comes from Taqwa
  • Fighting in the Sacred Months
  • This is the Ayah of the Sword
• 3:139-141 So do not become weak (against your enemy), nor be sad, and you will be superior (in victory) if you are indeed (true) believers. If a wound hath touched you, be sure a similar wound hath touched the others. Such days (of varying fortunes) We give to men and men by turns: that God may know those that believe, and that He may take to Himself from your ranks Martyr-witnesses (to Truth). And God loveth not those that do wrong.  And that Allah may test (or purify) the believers (from sins) and destroy the disbelievers. [Hilali &Khan]
  • The Encouragment to Do Good for which Paradise is the Result
  • The Muslim believes in all that Allah `revealed and all the Prophets
• 4:91 Ye will find others who seek to gain your confidence as well as that of their own people: So oft as they return to sedition, they shall be overthrown in it: But if they leave you not, nor propose terms or peace to you nor withhold their hands, then seize them, and slay them, wherever ye find them. Over these have we given you undoubted power.[Rodwell]
• 8:39  And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allah) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allah Alone [in the whole of the world]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allah), then certainly, Allah is All-Seer of what they do.[Hilali & Khan]
  • The Order to fight to eradicate Shirk and Kufr
  • The Order to fight until there is no more Fitnah
  • Righteousness comes from Taqwa
• 9:29  Make war upon such of those to whom the Scriptures have been given as believe not in God, or in the last day, and who forbid not that which God and His Apostle have forbidden, and who profess not the profession of the truth, until they pay tribute out of hand, and they be humbled.[Rodwell]
  • The Order to fight People of the Scriptures until They give the Jizyah
• 47:4 When ye encounter the infidels, strike off their heads till ye have made a great slaughter among them, and of the rest make fast the fetters. And afterwards let there either be free dismissals or ransomings, till the war hath laid down its burdens. Thus do. Were such the pleasure of God, he could himself take vengeance upon them: but He would rather prove the one of you by the other. And whoso fight for the cause of God, their works he will not suffer to miscarry;[Rodwell]
  • Muslims invoke Allah for Help, Allah sends the Angels to help Them

Riyad us-Salaheen, Book 11, Ch. 234 cites  many ahadith in proving the obligation of Jihad. It does not mention the above cited ayat, but does cite several others.  Reliance of the Traveler specifically offers 9:29 as justification for declaring war on Jews and Christians.

The Reliance of the Traveller. BOOK O: JUSTICE >> Chapter O-9.0: Jihad

O-9.8: The Objectives of Jihad
The caliph (o-25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o-11.4) -which is the significance of their paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions) (O: and the war continues) until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the word of Allah Most High,
"Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and His messenger have forbidden-who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book-until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled" (Koran 9.29)

Note the use of fitna in 8:39 as casus belli. It is also mentioned in 5:33 Muslims love to cite 5:32, but never quote its successor to Kuffar. Why is that?

5:32  Because of that We ordained for the Children of Israel that if anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or (and) to spread mischief in the land - it would be as if he killed all mankind, and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all mankind. And indeed, there came to them Our Messengers with clear proofs, evidences, and signs, even then after that many of them continued to exceed the limits (e.g. by doing oppression unjustly and exceeding beyond the limits set by Allah by committing the major sins) in the land!
5:33 The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter.

Ibn Kathir's tafsir of  5:33 has a blood curdling implication. Note the emphasized phrases.

`Wage war' mentioned here means, oppose and contradict, and it includes disbelief, blocking roads and spreading fear in the fairways. Mischief in the land refers to various types of evil.

Mere disbelief in Allah is sufficient to subject you to the hudud listed in the ayeh above cited! Now you rightly understand that Geert Wilders is not exaggerating in his video presentation.

    Without exception, the hate speech and incitement displayed in Fitna flow from Islam's canonical texts and the mouths of rabble rousing Imams, not from Geert Wilders.  The Secretary General does not condemn Allah, his Book, his Messenger or his rabble rousing preachers, he condemns the video which exposes them.

    Fitna is neither hate speech nor incitement, it is objective and factual; an exposure of the damnable doctrines of Islam and accursed practices which flow from belief in  them.

    The sentence quoted from the draft resolution is a lie: the UN does not condemn "any advocacy of religious hatred", instead, they condemn and seek the criminalization of any exposure of it, including this blog post.

Defamation of Religions vs Negative Stereotyping: SCIRF Gets It Wrong

 Leonard Leo, chairman of the board of SCIRF, testified before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, and Human Rights  on the International Religious Freedom Report. There is a move underway to defund SCIRF, presumably because its mission conflicts with Obamination's Islamophilia.

    While I sympathize with the SCIRF and believe that it should be preserved, I take issue with Leo's position on the resolution passed by the HRC last March and currently before the 3^rd Committee prior to a General Assembly vote in December.

    I do not contest the fact that SCIRF was instrumental in steering the resolutions in a new direction, I take issue with the assertion that the  resolution has been substantially improved and its negative impact on freedom of belief & expression substantially reduced.  Only the rhetoric has improved, the meaning, intent and effect are not improved.

Defamation of Religion in the United Nations -- Intolerance Resolution Takes the Place of Defamation Resolution: Over the past decade, resolutions in the UN General Assembly and UN Human Rights Council on the so-called defamation of religions sought to establish a global blasphemy law.  USCIRF’s engagement with the State Department, the U.S. Congress and specific UN member states helped bring about a notable decrease in support for these resolutions over the past three years.  It is an example of the catalytic and coordinating role that the Commission has played.

  Since 2008, the resolutions were supported by only a plurality of member states.  Due to this loss of support, the UN Human Rights Council in March 2011 adopted, in place of the divisive “combating defamation of religions” resolution, a consensus resolution on “combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization of, and discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence against persons based on religion or belief.”  The resolution properly focuses on protecting individuals from discrimination or violence, instead of protecting religions from criticism.  The new resolution protects the adherents of all religions or beliefs, instead of focusing on one religion.  Unlike the defamation of religions resolution, the new consensus resolution does not call for legal restrictions on peaceful expression, but rather, for positive measures, such as education and awareness-building, to address intolerance, discrimination, and violence based on religion or belief.

intolerance

    I can not and will never tolerate the practice & propagation of a doctrine which mandates that we be killed or subjugated, our property seized and our widows raped and our orphans sold into slavery.  By God, I stand on the rights seized by the founders, which they enshrined in the Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights.  I will not accept demands that I tolerate the intolerable.  I will not abide by laws, national or international, demanding silence in the face of approaching evil.

stereotyping

    Allah commands Muslims to wage war against us in 8:39 & 9:29. Those imperatives are confirmed by Moe's Sunnah in Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387 and other hadith. They are codified in Shari'ah: Reliance of the Traveller O9.8-9.9. Allah promises Muslims admission to his celestial bordello if they wage war and threatens them with eternal damnation if they shirk.  Allah gives extra credit for a better seat in his bordello if they take any step to injure or enrage us.

    So most Muslims "don't do that / don't believe that". Oh, don't they? Islam is not cafeteria Catholicism, as made clear by 2:85: "Then do you believe in a part of the Scripture and reject the rest? Then what is the recompense of those who do so among you, except disgrace in the life of this world, and on the Day of Resurrection they shall be consigned to the most grievous torment. ".

    If Muslims "don't do that", then how did the Hindu, Assyrian & Armenian genocides happen?  How do you explain shouts of Takbir in the school at Beslan and the aircraft over New York City? 

    Which Muslim is a believer who fights in Allah's cause, killing and being killed [9:111] and which is a hypocrite whose Islam "will not exceed their throats." [Sahih Bukhari 5.59.638]?

protects individuals

    Who is going to go to Egypt and protect the Copts and their homes, businesses & churches?  Will you send the Marines to Kenya & Nigeria to protect Christians there?  Who will protect Christians in Pakistan?  You and whose army, 24/7/365? 

    You do not protect individuals by passing resolutions, you protect them with "boots on the ground".  You can only protect indigenous Christian minorities by eliminating the Muslims who murder them with impunity. 

    The cartoonists did not assault or kill any Muslims; they did not destroy any property. Muslims, stirred up by rabble rousing Imams at Jumah Salat did that. Exactly how do those resolutions protect Muslims? 

    Islam is not defamed by revelation of the fatal facts linked in previous paragraphs. Muslims are not threatened or stereotyped by revealing those facts. Silencing criticism of Islam would not protect Islam from defamation, neither would it protect Muslims; it would only remove our ability to warn our fellow citizens of approaching danger. 

education

    The malignant & malicious practice of al-Taqiyya & kitman is not education, it is indoctrination.  Islam is not a religion, neither is it peaceful nor is it great. Islam is intra-species predation.  Education will happen if intelligent and rational people read the Qur'an, hadith & Shari'ah.  What currently happens in our educational & religious institutions is indoctrination.

concrete details

    I have prepared two tables comparing the defamation & stereotyping memes. The tables are complemented by relevant quotes from the Secretaries General of the OIC and UN, followed by evidence to further clarify the issue. Bold, blue, underlined text is hyperlinked to source documents.

defamation	stereotyping
Muhammad had coitus with a nine year old girl.	Muhammad had coitus with a nine year old girl.
God would never select an unrepentant sinner as his final prophet.	Muslims tend toward pedophilia because Muhammad is their role model.

Regardless of which standard of conduct is adopted, stating the fact revealed by Aisha, that she was nine years old when Moe consummated their marriage, will be criminalized and condemned. 

defamation	stereotyping	no religion should be equated with terrorism
I will cast terror to strike terror Allah cast terror You are more awful as a fear victorious with terror	I will cast terror to strike terror Allah cast terror You are more awful as a fear victorious with terro	I will cast terror to strike terror Allah cast terror You are more awful as a fear victorious with terro
Islamic doctrines incite terrorism.	Muslims are terrorists because they emulate Moe.	Islam = terrorism.

    No  matter how you slice it; whichever protocol  they follow, truthful statements about Islam must be outlawed and condemned.  Defamation || negative stereotyping is a distinction without a difference.

concrete examples

    In this quote from a speech to the OIC, Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu implies that  Geert Wilders' Fitna and the Danish Cartoons incite religious hatred & violence.

It is clearly established that international law and in particular the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) of 1966 forbids any incitement to religious hatred. Article 20 of this Covenant stipulates that “Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.” Despite this clear stipulation, the Attorney General of Denmark failed to see in the infamous Danish Cartoons issues on Prophet Mohamed, any incitement to hatred on bases of religion or belief. The same authority in the Netherlands did the same thing in the case of the film Fitna, produced by a Member of Dutch Parliament. Such negative or indifferent attitudes adopted by officials in certain Western countries which seem to condone acts of an Islamophobic nature, can only lead to legitimizing Islamophobia and enhancing discrimination against Muslims and exposing their well-being and safety to danger. [Speech 0f His Excellency Prof. Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, Secretary General 0f the Organisation 0f the Islamic conference, at Columbia University 21/09/2008]

    Ban Ki-moon also condemned Fitna.

Reuters quotes U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon about Fitna:"There is no justification for hate speech or incitement to violence," Ban said in a statement. "The right of free expression is not at stake here."

incitement ? 

Fitna

 Fitna juxtaposes violent Qur'an verses and hadith with the rabid hate speech & incitement of several Imams and the resulting terrorism & riots. Fitna does not incite, it exposes incitement.

Motoons

    The Motoons depict Moe as a terrorist.  They are humorous; they do not exhort or incite Kuffar to assault Muslims. Moe died before the invention of gun powder, but he was a terrorist by his own admission, having declared that he was "made victorious with terror". He deliberately built a reputation for egregious barbarian rapine so as to terrify his intended victims, rendering them disorganized and effectively defenseless.

Quran burning

    Pastor Terry Jones planned to hold a Qur'an burning 09/11/10. He chickened out, but in March of '11, he held a four hour mock trial of the Qur'an with Arabic speaking experts on both sides of the debate and, having found the Qur'an guilty of inciting violence, burned it. 

    Muslims in Pakistan, on exiting from Jumah Salat, rioted, resulting in several deaths and considerable property damage. Pastor Jones did not incite violence, the Pakistani Imams incited violence in their rabid rants at Friday prayer services.

Ihsanoglu's jaundiced view

The publication of offensive cartoons of the Prophet six years ago that sparked outrage across the Muslim world, the publicity around the film Fitna and the more recent Qur’an burnings represent incidents of incitement to hatred that fuel an atmosphere of dangerous mutual suspicion. Freedom of expression has to be exercised with responsibility. At the same time, violent reactions to provocations are also irresponsible and uncivilised and we condemn them unequivocally.[http://71.18.253.18/en/topic_details.asp?tID=239]

We have to be sure about what constitutes criticism but not incitement to hatred. For example, when somebody calls for burning of our holy book Qur`an, can it be considered as mere criticism? [http://71.18.253.18/en/topic_details.asp?tID=39]

The most recent and unfortunate in the series of such events was the announcement
pertaining to Bum a Koran Day. It was highly provocative towards the religious sentiments
of Muslims everywhere in the world and must be condemned in the strongest possible terms.
[Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu's speech to the HRC Session 15.]

legal foundation

    Moe ordered the murder of his critics; an example to be emulated.

Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4436:

It has been narrated on the authority of Jabir that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Who will kill Ka'b b. Ashraf? He has maligned Allah, the Exalted, and His Messenger. Muhammad b. Maslama said: Messenger of Allah, do you wish that I should kill him? He said: Yes. He said: Permit me to talk (to him in the way I deem fit). He said: Talk (as you like). So, Muhammad b. Maslama came to Ka'b and talked to him, referred to the old friendship between them and said: This man (i. e. the Holy Prophet) has made up his mind to collect charity (from us) and this has put us to a great hardship. When be heard this, Ka'b said: By God, you will be put to more trouble by him. Muhammad b. Maslama said: No doubt, now we have become his followers and we do not like to forsake him until we see what turn his affairs will take. I want that you should give me a loan. He said: What will you mortgage? He said: What do you want? He said: Pledge me your women. He said: You are the most handsome of the Arabs; should we pledge our women to you? He said: Pledge me your children. He said: The son of one of us may abuse us saying that he was pledged for two wasqs of dates, but we can pledge you (cur) weapons. He said: All right. Then Muhammad b. Maslama promised that he would come to him with Harith, Abu 'Abs b. Jabr and Abbad b. Bishr. So they came and called upon him at night. He came down to them. Sufyan says that all the narrators except 'Amr have stated that his wife said: I hear a voice which sounds like the voice of murder. He said: It is only Muhammad b. Maslama and his foster-brother, Abu Na'ila. When a gentleman is called at night even it to be pierced with a spear, he should respond to the call. Muhammad said to his companions: As he comes down, I will extend my hands towards his head and when I hold him fast, you should do your job. So when he came down and he was holding his cloak under his arm, they said to him: We sense from you a very fine smell. He said: Yes, I have with me a mistress who is the most scented of the women of Arabia. He said: Allow me to smell (the scent on your head). He said: Yes, you may smell. So he caught it and smelt. Then he said: Allow me to do so (once again). He then held his head fast and said to his companions: Do your job. And they killed him.

Shari'ah

    Reliance of the Traveller, O11.10  lists five acts which break the treaty of protection exposing a Dhimmi to execution. This is the fifth item in that list: "or mentions something impermissible about Allah, the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), or Islam."  What is impermissible to mention? O8.7 contains a list of 20 items including: "to revile Allah or His messenger ", "to deny the existence of Allah, His beginingless eternality, His endless eternality, or to deny any of His attributes which the consensus of Muslims ascribes to Him ", "to be sarcastic about Allah's name, His command, His interdiction, His promise, or His threat",  "to deny any verse of the Koran ", and "to revile the religion of Islam".

    In reality, the OIC seeks, through the UN, to impose Islamic blasphemy law on us, denying our right to warn our fellow citizens of the existential threat Islam poses to our lives, liberties & prosperity.   We were not stupid enough to outlaw criticism of Communism during the cold war, why should we outlaw criticism of Islam?