The Danger of the Istanbul Process
The objective of my presentation is to explain the role plaid by the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation, OIC, and its several attempts to try to ban freedom of expression on Islam across the world. First, I will explain what is the OIC and what are its goals; Secondly I will develop the killing freedom-islamic concept of “defamation of religions” supported by OIC and partly by the UN; Third I will finish with the “Istanbul process” and the western reaction against OIC anti-freedom and theocratic agenda.
What is OIC and its goals? OIC is one the most important intergovernemental organizations of the world. It groups 57 muslim countries and aims to defend muslim interest and to develop a political islamization all over the world. Its main leaders are Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Koweit, Turkey, Egypt; -The main goal of OCI are: -first to Reislamize muslim countries and submit muslim regimes and populations to Sharià. In this OIC global framework and theocratic strategy, I think that the “Arab spring” was a huge success for OIC and islamist dictatures because many secular regimes were removed and sharià progressed; That fore, I ALWAYS say that the FISRT VICTIMS of Radical Islamism are Muslims, muslim normal citizens, muslim freedom fighters, muslim whomens, muslims seculars, and muslim minorities, often forgot by the West. -second to Islamize the West, using muslim immigrants and avoiding their integration to western-unbelievers rules”. (what I call “volontier islamic apartheid”. That fore, the western alliance with sunni theocratic regimes such as OIC leaders is for me a suicide alliance. Though they are divided, the 4 main tendances of the OIC global Islamization Agenda, that I describes in my books (“The Islamic Totalitarianism” – 2002- and “Why Christians are murdered in the world today, The new christianophobia” – 2011 -, share OIC imperialist objectives to submit step by step the World: Those 4 main Charià supporters and Theocratic groups who fight secular democracies and open societies in the world are: -Saudi-wahhabism-and salafisme (at the head of all main islamic sunni organizations, NGO and Banks; -Muslim Brotherhood (born in Egypt but powerfull in all arab countries) -Turkish Milli Gorus Movement (a kind of Turkish-neo-ottoman-muslim brotherhood) and its AKP-Erdogan’s government in Ankara; -Indo-pakistani sunnis (who support for instance Taliban, many radical and terrorist groups over the world, and many intolerant and radical associations in Europe)
The Islamic Declaration of Human Rights -The first victory of OIC was the proclamation, in 1981, of the “Universal Islamic Declaration of Human rights » aiming that Charià must prevail to secular laws and to the Universal Human Rights Declaration of 1948. -In 1990, the OIC adopted, In Cairo, a new « Universal Islamic Déclaration of Human Rights in Islam ”. Its Preambule insist more clearly on the superiority of islamic law over civil rights and freedom of expression. Though those too Islamic Human Rights Declarations had not any binding effect, this constituted a real victory for OIC because the UN legitimized this Charià based Declarations. The concept of “Defamation of religions” and islamophobia The second step of the OIC plan has been implemented successfully inside of the United Nations since 1999, when the OIC began to promote the concept of ‘defamation of religions’. This concept is a serious threat to our democratic values because it aims at restricting freedom of speech as a way to “prevent intolerance” and religious hatred. It strangely compairs the right to criticize islam – a religion – to a racist crime and to ethnic hatred or insult. Every body know and understand that Religion is not a Race, but the strength and the efficiency of this confusion made on purpose by islamist activist and their leftists allied is based on the fact that any kind of critic against islam is penalized and targeted as “racism”, even in Europe. The Role of Pakistan Inside of the UN Human Right Council and the OIC, Pakistan has been the most active promoter of freedom-killing resolutions and of the strange and dangerous concept of “islamophobia”. In 1999, Pakistan presented to the HRC a resolution on “defamation of Islam,” which was later adapted to include all religions (“defamation of religions”). But the texts adopted by the HRC clearly denounced only “Islamophobia”, concept created by Ayatollah Khomeiny in 1990 in order to justify a death sentence against Salman Rushdie and after that to blame and crucify the so-called “western islamophobes”. A MIRROR ACUSATION Huge paradox: We can notice that the main supporters or “Defamation of religion” are the most intolerant and christianophobic States of the World, such as Saudi Arabia or Pakistan! Those totalitarian fanatic regimes who kill “apostates” and persecute christians and non-muslims are poorly placed to give moral lessons to democracies! For instance, let’s remind that Pakistan’s Penal Code condemns to death blasphemy, blasphemers, “apostates” and non-Muslim minorities who “insult islam” or are proselytes. Pakistan is one of the world’s most intolerant States towards Christian minorities. In effect, let’s remind that recently, former christian Pakistani minister Shahbaz Bhatti was killed in March 2011 simply because he defended Asia Bibi, a Christian sentenced to death for “blasphemy” just because she dared to drink “muslim water” while she was working in the field with muslim collegues who denounced her… Let’s remember that just some weeks before, a moderate and tolerant muslim politician, the former governer of Penjab, was also killed just because he claimed the innocence of Asia Bibi and asked to free her… The same “double standard” can be seen in the UN Human Rights Council, (established in June 2006), which always condemns western “Islamophobia”, but always remains silent about the massacres committed NOWADAYS by radical islamist groups or regimes against “pagans”, “apostates”, liberal muslims, Christians or budhist-hinduists in Pakistan, Bengladesh, Tchad, Sudan, Nigeria, Pakistan, or Egypt, Indeed, the UN Human Rights Council, controlled by Islamic countries and their “Red anti-West” allies in Middle East, Asia, Latin America and Africa (the Non-Aligned group – and what I called the “RED-BROWN-GREENS Alliance of Rogue States”), has never dared to criminalize the Christianophobia… -Let’s come back to the OIC freedom-killing decade plan: However, in 2001, the former Commission of Human Rights adopted a resolution against “Defamation of religions” and “islamophobia”. One of the objectives was to adopt an international resolution against Islamophobia which would impose deterrent penalties on those who dare to criticize islam or denounce islam legal charià violence. - In december 2005, a very important “Resolution against the defamation of religions” was held by Pakistan, before being presented among the UN General Assembly, -In March 2007, a non-binding resolution, that named Islam as the only religion concerned, was accepted with a majority of 108 votes. The text denounced the fact that, after September 11th, Islam was too often associated with terrorism, violence and human rights violations. We must underline this perverse strategy: instead of making a self critic and fighting against the legal charià roots of islamo-terrorism, the OIC used the September 11th’s tragedy as a new pretext to make the West feel guilty by accusing him to “crucify muslims” and by introducing a “clash of civilization”. It’s also why the United Nations created the “Alliance of Civilizations” to fight against what Samuel Huntington called the “clash of Civilization”. In fact, this so called “alliance of civilization” groups many anti-democratics and islamic regimes such as Iran or Turkey, and the western democraties who share a common “appeasement policy” and volontier dhimmitude toward the hostile islamic and anti-western world. Strangely, the west fills guilty for this “clash of civilization” attributed to American “neo-cons” and defensers of the West, but the main responsables of it are the anti-democratic “Red Bown Green” States who want to destroy universal human rights and open societies by blaming the West for everything and by spreading a hatred ideology against European and American civilization itself. - On march 2008, in this “post Corld War” and anti-West framework, a new step, much more serious, has been made when the higher body of the UN adopted this OIC’s Resolution. The General Assembly declared to be deeply “hurt “ by the defamation of religion and Islam over the world and specifically in western democracies” (pretexting that Irak and Afghanistan wars where “islamophobics” and “genocides” against Muslims), but did not say a word in favour of Christians genocides in south Soudan in the same period. In the name of subversive conception of Tolerance, OIC requested that western democracies introduce in their civil law a penalization of “islamophobia”. As said before us the great western thinker Sir Karl Popper, Tolerance has been used by Intolerants to destroy the Tolerant societies in the name of Tolerance.. -In 2009, 23 countries voted in favor of the Resolution. -In 2010, another similar Resolution was adopted by the Human Rights Council. (condemning the Swiss popular initiative banning the minarets). -In June 2010, speaking on behalf of OIC, Pakistan demanded that the UN Human Rights Council take strong action against “Islamophobia” in the West. 2011: First victory of the Freedom camp Surprisingly, in June 2011, after many years of resistance against OIC concept of “Defamation of religions” and thanks to people like David Littman and Roy Brown) a Human Rights Council Committee decided to abandon the concept of “defamation of religions”. This UN Committee was composed by 18 independent « high level » experts who concluded that anti-blasphemy laws, such as those implemented in Egypt, Saudi Arabia or Pakistan, are violating Human Rights. The 16/18 Resolution of december 2011 But the “defamation of religion” and “islamophobia” concept were reformulated by OIC and by others terms with a new Resolution (named “16/18”), presented in the Human Right Council and adopted by consensus on 19 december 2011. This 16/18 Resolution aimed the same killing-freedom objective, but indirectly, by “fighting against intolerance, negative stereotyping, stigmatization, discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against individuals because of their religion or belief”. It did not use anymore the term « defamation of religions”, but another expression more astute : «bases of their religion or belief » which means in fact exactly the same things. This new formulation emphazises protection of people, and not anymore on the religion it-self, as it had been rejected before. -The “Istanbul Process” against Freedom of thinking and expression After that, a new strategy to implement the “16/18 Resolution” was conceived by Turkish OIC General Secretary Eshanoglu, who decided to held in Istanbul in July 2011, an international meeting. This new OIC “Istanbul Conference” aimed to ban any critics of religions and islam under the pretext of fighting the “intolerance against religions”. Let me now mention the OIC text itself about this new strategy: The Istanbul Brainstorming Session yielded new ideas towards promoting in a new way the legality of the concept of “defamation of religions” in terms of the existing Human Rights framework; OIC text says: “we must create the necessary environment conducive to “prohibition of defamation of religions and incitement to hatred, violence and discrimination on religious grounds”: - “OIC has been consistent at emphasizing the importance of the limits to the right to freedom of opinion and expression, in a structured multilateral framework, and in the light of events like the burning of Quran according to the “test of consequence”. What is the “Test of consequences”? , It’s a very dangerous concept, because it makes guilty for islamic violence not the muslim fanatics who kill blamemathors or anti-islam thinkers, but the caricaturists or islamophobes themselves, such as Danish cartoons or Theo Van Gogh: all those who “provocate” violent reaction of muslims by “hurting their beliefs”.. The OIC text follows: “We call for a global awareness on the dangerous implications (consequences) of the rise of Islamophobia on world peace and security. We emphasize the need to develop, at the UN, including the HRC, a legally binding institutional instrument to promote respect for all religions and cultural values and prevent intolerance, discrimination and the instigation of hatred against any group or followers of any religion”. After the first Istanbul meeting, in december 2011, 12-14th, OIC met in Washington the Obama Administration in order to convince american President Barak Obama to adhere to this “Istanbul Process and to implement the 16/18 Resolution adopted on march 24 of 2011 in Geneva. With an official Hillary Clinton verbal approval, the OIC scored a diplomatic important coup. Now, following the Obama Administration, the European Union now plans to host the next Istanbul Process, scheduled for July 2012. What about European Union? What can we do? Firstly, Europe MUST SAY NO to any kind of limitation or penalization of the right of criticizing any religion! Even as a believer, I’ll never support any law who limits the right of any one to criticize my religion, because every one must be able to express his one thinking on any ideology or religion. We can and we Must block this process as it has been once blocked in 2010-2011. This must be stopped by all democrats, freedom fighters, secular leaders, human rights defenders, at the UN, the EU, etc. I think that the Members of the European Parliament can play a very efficient role by rejecting this freedom killing new step of the OIC plan. Crucify the crucifiers! : the emergency of a new rethoric Secondly, we must use the same efficient weapons as radical islamists, OIC strategists and their politically correct allies “leftists” or “goodists”. How? By Being more involved in the “semantic” or “verbal fight”. Because since the beginning of the Humanity and since men speak, the one who controls the words controls the minds by key-words. Because of the straights links between brain and words, this “semantic war” leds to a “psychological war”. That fore, Leftists and Islamists are very efficients when their use what I call “neuro-semantic weapons” that aims at making filling guilties their enemies by crucifying, targeting them, and by presenting themselves as “victims”, “good” or “anti-fascists resistants”… We all know how this is fake and not true, but their semantic war is efficient since the 1960’eas… and paralyse the old West and Europe that feels gulty of its past and its present. In this framework, we can counter this Islamist-Leftist offensive of penalizing “islamophobia” and crucifying the “intolerant” or “fascist-racist” west by too main counter-accusation (never justify, always accuse): -1/first, though many of us are secular, non-christians, non-muslims, jews or atheist, we must act with the same weapons as OIC by blaming islamic countries for persecuting, killing, putting in jail, or genociding so many Christians, non-muslim, liberal muslims-apostates, and show at the UN, the EU and all international bodies, that OIC and muslim countries just blame western islamophobia and penalise any critics of Islam in order to hide the fact that they persecute their minorities. This Mirror accusation based on hidind their christianophobie by accusing the west of being “islamophobic” aims to prevent any non-muslim reaction toward the islamic OIC goal to conquer and islamize the humanity; Reverse their Reductio ad Hitlerum strategy… 2/ second, we must use or “reverse” against our opponents what the important german-american jewish philosopher Leo Strauss called in 1953 the “Reductio ad Hitlerum”. The Reductio ad Hitlerum consists in blaming, demonizing and crucifying the other by accusing him of being “fascist, nazi”, racist, or “acting like Nazis, etc. Against this Leftist-islamist permanent accusation, we should more often remind the important alliance between Palestian movement, Muslim Brotherhood, Muslim-Arab regimes and Nazis, neo-nazis, and “negationnists” since the 30eas until now. We should remember that Muslim Brotherhood, former Egyptian president Abdel Nasser, and many Islamist political parties such as Hamas admired or still admire The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, the most important arab-islamist leader who was a personal friend and ally of Hitler. We must answer that Saudi Arabia, Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Irak, Pakistan, Hezbollah, Hamas, and even “pro-western” Turkey are since the end of second world war the main promoters of negationnist, nazi, anti-Semites publications, doctrines and hatred ideas. We must Show that when islamists or their leftists allies pro-Hamas and pro-Hezbollah present themselves as “the New Jewish” persecuted by the “New Nazi-Israelian State” and by their “Imperialist American Allies”, they just insult Jewish Holocaust, jewish memory and jewish history. The conclusion and the reality is that Radical Islamism is the New Nazism, the Third Totalitarianism, the New Global Fascism, the most efficient Hatred System, the most terrible anti-Semite totalitarianism, the most Racist and Imperialistic ideology. And the first victims of this Massive Destruction Ideology are first muslims who live under threat and terror, second Christian and non-muslim minorities. On the contrary, anti-Jihad freedom fighters, Asia Bibi Supporters, anti-Sharià fighters who want to free Muslims and non-Muslims who live under islamo-totalitarian regimes are the Real new Resistant. They are not anti-Muslims, but they are in favour of Open societies, Tolerance and they fight any kind of new fascism and dictatorship, even if this New fascism hides itself behind a Religion. We must be Sure of ourselves. Open societies must now stop justifying themselves. On the contrary, we must react and make them filling guilty. We must request to their governments that they apologize for the genocides and the crimes they are doing against so many Christians, “pagans”, atheists, “apostates”, “blasphemors” in Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Irak, Egypt, Pakistan, Sudan or Nigeria.