Pakistan: 'No review of blasphemy law': Pakistan’s Minister for Religious Affairs.

Pakistan: 'No review of blasphemy law': Pakistan’s Minister for Religious Affairs.(Mnnonline).

Earlier this week, various reports surfaced saying that a Senate committee in Pakistan wanted to examine the blasphemy law and perhaps add checks and balances so the law is less abused.

However, since word got out about re-examining the blasphemy law, Pakistan’s Minister for Religious Affairs, Sardar Muhammad Yousuf, released a statement refuting the rumor.

Brother Ray with Voice of the Martyrs, Canada explains, “He said they have turned down all the news regarding the change in the blasphemy law. Various news agencies had been circulating on social media and news reports that were released that the government is likely to change the existing blasphemy law. [Yousef] said, ‘We have no plan to diversify or modify the blasphemy law.’

He said, ‘The present democratic government is fully determined and affirms to implement the existing law in true spirit. It has no concoction to make any change in the blasphemy law.’”

The blasphemy law has led to the imprisonment of many Pakistani Christians and religious minorities. Anyone who is accused of insulting Islam faces a potential death sentence.

“Over the years, we’ve worked with several blasphemy cases in the country and, without a doubt, Christians have really been abused by this law. We have seen many fine believers who have been thrown in jail. Asia Bibi, probably one of the most highlighted cases, in the last seven years she’s been in prison,” says Brother Ray.

“Also, there are countless others we have worked with over the years that, because Muslims are jealous because they’re being blessed in their businesses or things like this, they would take a page of the Koran or verses of the Koran, they would burn it and throw it in front of their shop, and then accuse these people of blasphemy. Then while these business owners were going through months and months (if not years) of court cases, the Muslims would take over their businesses and shut them down, take their properties, all kinds of devious things they have done because of the situation with the blasphemy law.”


Although there have been several abuses of the blasphemy law, Brother Ray says there are Pakistani Muslims who recognize the abuses and oppose it. Read the full story here.

You can also click here to check out persecution and prayer alerts with Voice of the Martyrs, Canada to stay up to date on the persecuted Church around the world.

Pakistan - ‘Blasphemous’ Muslim Assassinated.

Pakistan - ‘Blasphemous’ Muslim Assassinated.(NYT).

Muhammad Shakil Auj, a liberal Muslim scholar accused of blasphemy, was shot dead in Karachi on Thursday. 

Auj was accused of the crime by four other professors after giving a speech in the U.S. in 2012 as well as for his liberal views, such as the idea that Muslim women should be allowed to marry non-Muslim men. He was shot in the head and neck by gunmen on a motorbike. Auj had previously complained to police about death threats.

Nasir Lodhi, a senior police official, said that Dr. Auj told the police that four professors at the University of Karachi had accused him of blasphemy for comments he made during that speech. Mr. Lodhi said he could not say where the speech was made, or the nature of the offending comments.

Dr. Auj lodged a criminal complaint against the four professors, who were later arrested by the police. One of them, Dr. Abdul Rasheed, had previously held Dr. Auj’s position as dean of Islamic studies at the university. The four men face trial but are currently free on bail, the police said.

Around the same time, a religious seminary in Karachi issued a fatwa against Dr. Auj, accusing him of blasphemy and calling for his death.

Blasphemy is punishable by death in Pakistan, and in recent years there has been an uptick in vigilante killings related to accusations. Auj had written 15 books about Islam and last month was awarded the presidential medal of distinction in Pakistan for education and research. Read more at New York Times

Did you know that Europe already Passed "Blasphemy Laws"?

Read the full 'law' here.

Sadly they can't deport a terrorist

French paper Charlie Hebdo to publish comic book life of Prophet Mohammed.

Charlie Hebdo Cartoon "God Doesn't Excist"

French paper Charlie Hebdo to publish comic book life of Prophet Mohammed.(AA).A French weekly known for publishing cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed to the ire of conservative Muslims said Sunday it plans to release a comic book biography of Islam’s founder that will be researched and educational.
Satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo has on several occasions depicted Islam’s prophet in an effort to defend free speech and defy the anger of Muslims who believe depicting Mohammed is sacrilegious.
“It is a biography authorized by Islam since it was edited by Muslims,” said Charlie Hebdo’s publisher and the comic’s illustrator, who goes by the name Charb.
“I don’t think higher Muslim minds could find anything inappropriate,” Charb said.
The biography will be published Wednesday and was put together by a Franco-Tunisian researcher known only as Zineb, Charb said.
The publisher said the idea for the comic book came to him in 2006 when a newspaper in Denmark published cartoons of Mohammed, later republished by Charlie Hebdo, drawing angry protests across the Muslim world.
“Before having a laugh about a character, it’s better to know him. As much as we know about the life of Jesus, we know nothing about Mohammed,” Charb said.
In September Charlie Hebdo published cartoons of a naked Mohammed as violent protests were taking place in several countries over a low-budget film made in the United States that insults the prophet.
In 2011 Charlie Hebdo’s offices were hit by a firebomb and its website pirated after publishing an edition titled “Charia Hebdo” featuring several Mohammed cartoons.
Charb, who has received death threats, lives under police protection.Hmmmm......French Version of 'Death Wish'?Read the full story here.

Video - Ezra Levant and Charles Krauthammer: "Censorship and Islam."

Ezra Levant is joined by Charles Krauthammer to discuss Islam and censorship.

Video - Pat Condell "Ha Ha Islamophobia."

Netherlands to abolish blasphemy law.

Netherlands to abolish blasphemy law.(RT).Dutch parliament approves a motion to scrap law that made insulting God a crime. The move is welcomed by freedom of speech supporters and confirms anti-Islamists’ right to criticize religion. The blasphemy law is no longer relevant in the 21st century, a majority of Dutch parties stated. This law has not been in use for more than half a century, Dutch MPs added.
Liberal parties’ predominance in the current Dutch parliament has made the repeal of the 1930s law possible, with the same motion blocked by Christian political party’s allies back in 2008. The issue was brought to the attention of the parliament following the 2011 Geert Wilders case. Wilders, a far-right anti-Islam MP, was acquitted after facing trial on charges of inciting hatred and discriminations against Muslims. The judge ruled Wilders’ comparisons of Islam to fascism “acceptable,” allowing further criticism despite it insulting Muslims. 
The blasphemy law abolition was welcomed by freedom rights activists across the globe as a victory.However the decision was dubbed as a “painful loss of a moral anchor and a symptom of a spiritual crisis” by Dutch Christian SGP party, media reported. It is still illegal to insult police officers or the country’s monarch under the Dutch law. Many European countries still have blasphemy laws restricting freedom of expression, rights activists say. Others have replaced such laws with more general legislation criminalizing religious hatred.
The UK has annulled its blasphemy law, replacing it with the Racial and Religious Hatred Act in 2007. The new law implies a prison term of up to seven years and an unlimited fine for the intention of stirring up religious hatred. Ireland stood out by introducing a new blasphemy law in 2010, instead of abolishing it. The recent Irish Defamation Act makes “publication or utterance of blasphemous matter” punishable by a fine of up to €25,000. Although such laws have not been invoked for decades in most of Europe, there remain some countries where charges on grounds of religious hatred have often been exercised. Read the full story here.

UAE wins seat on U.N. Human Rights Council, garners highest Asia vote.

UAE wins seat on U.N. Human Rights Council, garners highest Asia vote.(AA).The United Arab Emirates succeeded on Monday in its bid for election to the 47-nation U.N. Human Rights Council for a three-year term starting from early 2013. The Gulf state was elected in a secret ballot conducted by the U.N. General Assembly in which 21 candidate countries from 18 geographical groups competed for 18 vacant seats. 
The UAE got 184 votes, the highest vote turnout of the total votes garnered by the four winning Asian countries and the second highest votes of the total 18 winners. Ivory Coast, Ethiopia, Gabon, Kenya, and Sierra Leone were elected from Africa, and Japan, Kazakhstan, Pakistan, South Korea joined the United Arab Emirates from the Asia Group. Estonia and Monte Negro were elected from Eastern Europe, while Argentina, Brazil, and Venezuela secured seats on behalf of the Latin America and Caribbean Group.
The UAE foreign affairs minister, Anwar Mohammad Gargash, welcomed the UAE’s victory. “The win crowned a series of achievements made by the UAE in its human rights record over the recent years, particularly in areas of legislations to uphold and protect fundamental freedoms and legal rights of individuals, rights of women and children and advanced regulations on rights of foreign workforce,” the official said, according to AFP news agency. He added: ‘The UAE win of the seat for the next three years will lay on our shoulder additional onus and commitment to stay our course firmly in consistence with constitutional principles on which the UAE state is built and which place respect for human rights at the top of national priorities.’’ The 193-nation U.N. General Assembly also elected 17 other countries for terms beginning in January. The United States won the most votes of the regional group “Western Europe and Others,” followed by Germany and Ireland.Hmmmm......."Blasphemy laws on their way."Read the full story here.

"Pakistan and Blasphemy" - Again Blasphemy allegations: Lahore school female teacher in hiding.

"Pakistan and Blasphemy" - Again Blasphemy allegations: Lahore school female teacher in hiding.(PT).LAHORE: A Pakistani teacher at the centre of a blasphemy row was in hiding Friday as her school management denied all responsibility for the “dirty act” and called for her to be punished.
Arfa Iftikhar was forced into hiding after a furious mob stormed Farooqi Girls’ High School in the eastern city of Lahore over a piece of homework she set that allegedly contained derogatory references to prophet Mohammad (pbuh).
Blasphemy is an extremely sensitive issue in Pakistan, where 97 percent of the population are Muslims, and allegations of insulting Islam or the prophet Mohammed (pbuh) can prompt violent outbursts of public anger, even when unproven. The school management took out front page adverts in two leading newspapers on Friday to deny it had any knowledge of the supposed insults to the prophet, saying Iftikhar distributed the work just 10 minutes before the school closed for the Eidul Azha holiday. “Our school management and the owners have no link whatsoever with this dirty act,” the advertisement in Urdu said. “We appeal to the government and the police to take legal action against this teacher and investigate her real motive”. The school’s headmaster Asim Farooqi has been remanded in custody for 14 days on charges of blasphemy, which can attract the death penalty, police officer Azam Manhais told AFP, while a search was under way for Iftikhar.
Farooqi’s lawyer Jawad Ashraf said they would apply for bail on Saturday and accused police of bowing to the mob over the headmaster’s arrest.
Activists say Pakistan’s harsh blasphemy laws are often abused to settle personal scores, and Ashraf said the possibility of a conspiracy against the school, one of the most successful in Lahore, could not be ruled out. Farooqi’s son Sameer Asim Farooqi, one of the school’s administrators, said the way the case had panned out was “strange”. “It seems that an organised gang attacked our school. The attackers were mostly teenagers and they had batons in their hands, but some of them were also armed (with firearms),” he said. “We also heard there were announcements in the nearby mosques about the incident to inflame the public.” Sameer Farooqi said Iftikhar had been sacked, despite telling the principal she had copied out the offending passage by mistake. Hmmmm......"The land that time forgot?Read the full story here.

Saudi King urges U.N. action against religious insults.

Saudi King urges U.N. action against religious insults.(AA).Saudi King Abdullah on Saturday demanded a U.N. resolution condemning insults on monotheistic religions after a low-budget film produced in the U.S. sparked deadly protests last month.

“I demand a U.N. resolution that condemns any country or group that insults religions and prophets,” he said during a meeting at his palace with religious figures and heads of hajj delegations in the Mina valley where pilgrims were performing final rituals of hajj.

“It is our duty and that of every Muslim to protect Islam and defend the prophets.”

A low-budget film produced in the U.S., Innocence of Muslims, triggered a wave of deadly anti-American violence last month across the Muslim world targeting US symbols ranging from embassies and schools to fast food chains.Saudi Arabia had threatened to block YouTube in the kingdom if Google did not respond to a request to deny access to the video footage of the film. YouTube then extended its restrictions on the video to Saudi Arabia.

The king also called on Saturday for the “unity of the Islamic nation (and) rejecting division to face the nation’s enemies” as he urged for dialogue among Muslims.

“Dialogue strengthens moderation and ends reasons of conflict and extremism,” he said.

“The interconfessional dialogue center which we had announced in Mecca does not necessarily mean reaching agreements on the matters of belief, but it aims at reaching solutions to divisions and implementing co-existence among sects,” he added.Read the full story here.

Related: Muslim Brotherhood 'God Father' Qaradawi Organization Helping Qatar Draft Blasphemy Law that will be presented to the United Nations.

Imran Khan: "Muslim leaders fail to explain pain we feel when Prophet is mocked."

Imran Khan: "Muslim leaders fail to explain pain we feel when Prophet is mocked."(TZ).The leader of Pakistan's Movement for Justice Party (PTI), Imran Khan, told Today's Zaman in an exclusive interview, “It is up to the Muslim elite to explain to the Western world how much pain a Muslim feels when the Prophet Muhammad is mocked and made fun of in cartoons.”
He added that “freedom of speech should not be misused to cause pain to 1.3 Billion people.” Commenting on the different way Christians and Muslims interpret religion, he emphasized that Westerners often do not view religion with the same reverence and daily devotion that Muslims do. “In Europe religion does not play a large role in people's life. While in England at university, I saw films making fun of Jesus Christ. They do not treat God and the Prophet as we do. Therefore, they are surprised at the way Muslims react,” he explained.
When asked about his plans if elected prime minister, he recalled the vision of the Pakistani founding fathers for an “Islamic welfare state,” as he called it. “A democratic state that provides for the welfare of its people; a state with rule of law and sovereignty,” he added.
When asked about the killing of Osama bin Laden, the leader of al-Qaeda, Khan described the action as disrespectful of Pakistani sovereignty and damaging to relations with the US, noting that dignity and respect are necessary components of a successful relationship. He also criticized the US for not putting bin Laden on trial. “Even Nazis were given a trial in Nuremberg. Nazis were responsible for killing millions of people, and 30 percent of them were acquitted at trial. That was the peak of American civilization; they believed in the rule of law and justice.
Here, too, they could have captured bin Laden and put him on trial, but instead they assassinated him. I think countries are considered great civilizations rather than barbarian societies when they follow the due process of law. They should have dealt with bin Laden like they did with Saddam Hussein.”Read the full story here.

The Rape and Murder of Pakistan's Christian Children.

The Rape and Murder of Pakistan's Christian Children.(MiddleEastForum).By Raymond Ibrahim.
Investigative Project on Terrorism.

The West sighed in relief when Rimsha Masih, the 14-year-old Christian girl arrested in Pakistan on August 16 for allegedly burning pages of the Quran, was finally released. Yet the West remains clueless concerning the graphic abuses—including rape and murder—Christian children in Pakistan routinely suffer, simply for being Christian. Consider two stories alone, both of which occurred at the same time Rimsha's blasphemy ordeal was making headlines around the world.
On August 14, another Christian girl, 12-year-old Muqadas Kainat (which means "Holy Universe") was ambushed in a field near her home in Sahawil by five Muslim men who "gang raped and murdered" her. At the time, her father was at a hospital visiting her sick mother. He and other family members began a frantic search, until a tip led them to the field where his daughter's body lay. The postmortem revealed that she had been "gang raped and later strangled to death by five men." Police, as usual, did not arrest anyone. As a Salem News report puts it, "Complicating matters is the fact that several Christian girls in this remote area have been raped and forced to both marry into the Muslim community and abandon their own religion, human rights groups report…. there is a history in this part of Pakistan according to the Christian community, of local authorities failing to investigate cases of rape or other violence against Christians, often for fear of influential Muslims or militants."
Similarly, on August 20, an 11-year-old Christian boy, Samuel Yaqoob, went to the markets of Faisalabad to buy food for his family, never to return. According to Wilson Chowdhry, Chairman of the British Pakistani Christian Association, "After extensive searching his body was found near a drain in the Christian colony, bearing marks of horrific torture, with the murder weapon nearby. His nose, lips and belly had been sliced off, and his family could hardly recognize him because the body was so badly burnt. Some 23 wounds by a sharp weapon have been identified in the autopsy. When sending his body for an autopsy, police raised the possibility of sodomy. Parts of Pakistani culture have a strong homosexual pederast culture, and Christian and other minority boys are especially susceptible to rape and abuse because of the powerlessness of their community and their despised status. In one case fairly recently, a Christian boy was kidnapped, raped, tortured and killed by a police officer, his body similarly being dumped in a drain."
These were just some of the stories concerning the sexual abuse and murder of Pakistan's Christian children that occurred last August—even as the world stood in awe at the Rimsha Masih blasphemy case. Here are 10 more examples, chosen at random from the many former documented cases:

• Nisha, a 9-year-old Christian girl was abducted by Muslims, gang-raped, murdered by repeated blows to her head, and then dumped into a canal (May, 2009).
• Gulfam, another 9-year-old Christian girl, was raped by a Muslim man. Though not killed, she was left "in shock and in the throes of a physical and psychological trauma." During her ordeal, her rapist told her "not to worry because he had done the same service to other young Christian girls" (December, 2010).
• Lubna, a 12-year-old Christian girl was kidnapped, gang-raped, and murdered by a group of Muslims (October, 2010).
• Kidnapped last Christmas Eve, a 12-year-old Christian girl known as "Anna" was gang raped for eight months, forcibly converted and then "married" to her Muslim attacker. After she escaped, instead of seeing justice done, "the Christian family is in hiding from the rapists and the police" (October, 2011).
• After gang-raping a 13-year-old Christian girl, a band of Muslims came to her house when all male members were away working and "mercilessly" beat her pregnant aunt causing her to lose female twins to miscarriage: "They murdered our children, they raped our daughter. We have nothing left with us," lamented an older family member. The police went on to accuse the 13-year-old raped girl of "committing adultery with three men" (June, 2012).
• A Muslim man murdered a teenage Christian girl, Amariah, during an attempted rape: he had "grabbed the girl and, under the threat of a gun, tried to drag her away. The young woman resisted, trying to escape the clutches of her attacker, when the man opened fire and killed her instantly, and later tried to conceal the corpse" (December, 2011).
• Muslims abducted a 14-year-old Christian girl, Mehek, at gunpoint in broad daylight from her parents' house. One of her abductors declared he would "purify her" by making her "Muslim and my mistress" (August, 2011).
• Shazia, a 12-year-old Christian girl, was enslaved, raped, and murdered by Chaudhry Naeem, a rich Muslim lawyer, who was acquitted. His wife and son had participated in abusing the child (November, 2010).
• Nadia, a Christian girl who was abducted in 2001 when she was 15-years-old and forced to marry a Muslim, only recently returned to her Catholic family (January, 2012).
• A powerful Muslim businessman had two Christian sisters kidnapped, forced to convert to Islam, and "married" to him (May, 2011).

In every one of these cases, Pakistani police either failed to act or sided with the rapists and murderers.
The anecdotes represent a mere sampling of the documented atrocities committed against the children of Pakistan's Christians, who amount for a miniscule 1.5% of the nation's population. Then there are the stories that never make it to any media—stories of silent abuse that only the nameless, faceless victims know. For example, it took five years for the story of a 2-year-old toddler who was savagely raped because her Christian father refused to convert to Islam to surface. After undergoing five surgeries, her anatomy remains disfigured and she suffers from several permanent complications. Her family lives in fear and hiding.
How many Christian children in Pakistan are being mauled in silence, with their stories never surfacing?
And what animates this savagery? Discussing the aforementioned rape of 9-year-old Gulfam, local sources in Pakistan put it well: "It is shameful. Such incidents occur frequently. Christian girls are considered goods to be damaged at leisure. Abusing them is a right. According to the [Muslim] community's mentality it is not even a crime. Muslims regard them as spoils of war."
Indeed, here is how the late Majid Khadduri, "internationally recognized as one of the world's leading authorities on Islamic law and jurisprudence," explained the idea of human "spoils" in his War and Peace in the Law of Islam:

The term spoil (ghanima) is applied specifically to property acquired by force from non-Muslims. It includes, however, not only property (movable and immovable) but also persons, whether in the capacity of asra (prisoners of war) or sabi (women and children). … If the slave were a woman, the master was permitted to have sexual connection with her as a concubine.

From here, one can begin to understand the rabid fanaticism that possessed Pakistan's Muslims concerning the Rifsha blasphemy case, which resulted in mass riots, Muslim threats to take the law in their own hands, and the dislocation of Christians, some of whom have been forced to live and worship in the wilderness: if infidel Christians, especially their children, are seen as mere "spoils" to be used and disposed of with impunity, certainly it must be intolerable for Muslims if one of these "sub-humans" dares to desecrate Islam's holy book—the same book that ordains their inhuman status.
And herein is the true significance of the Rifsha Masih case: success can be measured not in the fact that this one particular Christian child got away from the savageries of Islamic law and culture, but whether her ordeal will begin to open Western eyes to the terrors Pakistan's Christian children routinely face.

Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum.

receive the latest by email: subscribe to the free mef mailing listThis text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.

Iranian director prepares 70-episode TV series on prophet Moses.

Iranian director prepares 70-episode TV series on prophet Moses.(TI).Iranian director Farajullah Salahshur, who is known for his religious movies, is preparing to shoot a 70-episode TV series about Prophet Moses (Musa), Fars reported. Moses was, according to the Hebrew Bible and the Quran, a religious leader, lawgiver and prophet, to whom the authorship of the Torah is traditionally attributed. He is considered an important prophet in Christianity and Islam, as well as a number of other faiths. Salahshur said thus far about half of the script has been written under supervision and guidance from various religious leaders and advisers of Iran's Qom province. Salahshur said that according to statistics, Shiite religious films tend to attract a much wider audience, as these films are more interesting to viewers. "These series would describe various aspects of the prophet's life, and content of this story itself is very rich," Salahshur, who is both writer and director of the film, said. Based on the agreement signed with the Iranian state television channels, where the film will be showing once completed, Salahshur said the script would be fully done in about a year. Earlier, Salahshur directed the film about the Prophet Yousuf which tells the story of Prophet Yousuf from the Quran and Islamic tradition. The film achieved great success in the Muslim countries. Hmmm......Lets hope the streets won't be filled with raging & Rioting Christians and Jews.Read the full story here.

You know you live in an "Islamist State" When.....Renowned Turkish pianist to appear on trial for insulting religion.

You know you live in an "Islamist State" When.....Renowned Turkish pianist to appear on trial for insulting religion.(HD).Famous Turkish pianist Fazıl Say's trial for remarks he made on Twitter allegedly supporting atheism begins in an Istanbul court today. The indictment calls for Say to be sentenced to 18 months in prison for "insulting the religious values of a section of society." A number of prominent artists have expressed their support for Say in a written statement, protesting court cases that they said are forced upon artists. Minister for EU Affairs Egemen Bağış expressed his regret at the trial: "I wish Fazıl Say wouldn't oblige us to make such explanations on international platforms." Hmmmm......“Thank God Almighty,” said Mr. Erdogan in 1994, when he was the mayor of Istanbul. “I am a servant of Shariah.” Read the full story here.

OIC : "West’s free speech stand bars blasphemy ban."

OIC : "West’s free speech stand bars blasphemy ban."(AA).Western opposition has made it impossible for Muslim states to obtain a ban on blasphemy, including anti-Islamic videos and cartoons that have touched off deadly riots, the Islamic world’s top diplomat said.

Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, secretary general of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), said his 57-nation body would not try again for United Nations support to ban insults to religion, but appealed for states to apply hate-speech laws concerning Islam. 

“We could not convince them,” said the Turkish head of the 57-member organization which had tried from 1998 until 2011 to get a United Nations-backed ban on blasphemy. “The European countries don’t vote with us, the United States doesn’t vote with us.” Western countries see the publication of such images and materials as a matter of free speech.
The posting of an amateurish U.S.-made video portraying the Prophet Mohammad as a foolish womanizer and the publication of caricatures of him in France last month led to violent protests and renewed calls from the Muslim world for a global law against blasphemy. The protests claimed some two dozen lives. Ihsanoglu told a conference in Istanbul at the weekend that the OIC had failed to win a ban at the United Nations and would not revive its long diplomatic campaign for one. Asked about recent media reports that the OIC wanted to resume the campaign for a blasphemy ban, he said: “I never said this and I know this will never happen.”
The OIC respects freedom of expression but sees anti-Islam videos and cartoons as an abuse of this freedom that Western countries should sanction through their own blasphemy or hate crime laws, he said. Ihsanoglu’s statement clarified the OIC stand at a time when Muslim religious leaders have stepped up demands for an international blasphemy law and politicians have accused Western states of spreading anti-Muslim hatred under the protection of their free-speech laws.
Ihsanoglu said Western states had a “strange understanding” of free speech if it could be abused to hurt and insult others. Responding at the United Nations last month to the Muslim protests against the U.S.-made video “Innocence of Muslims” parodying Prophet Mohammad, President Barack Obama condemned the film but staunchly defended free speech. “The strongest weapon against hateful speech is not repression, it is more speech -- the voices of tolerance that rally against bigotry and blasphemy,” he said.

Explaining his decision not to pursue a world ban, Ihsanoglu said the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and a non-binding 2011 U.N. General Assembly resolution against religious intolerance provided a sufficient basis for U.N. member states to take legal action. “We have enough law and we need to implement these laws,” he said. 

Muslim politicians have stepped up their denunciations of Western free speech policies following the video and cartoons lampooning Prophet Mohammad. Muslims consider any criticism of him as highly offensive and beyond free speech protection. “We cannot accept insults to Islam under the guise of freedom of thought,” Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan told the Istanbul conference. “We Muslims want the same respect shown to Jewish culture, which we support,”
Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said. But while editorialists and religious leaders have renewed calls for a worldwide blasphemy ban, few national leaders have actually ended their rhetorical reactions with that demand. One who did at the United Nations last month was President Asif Ali Zardari of Pakistan, whose own national blasphemy law has come under increasing criticism at home and abroad as open to widespread abuse against minority Christians. Ihsanoglu, speaking at the conference on a panel with Pakistani opposition leader Imran Khan, encouraged countries with blasphemy laws to apply against insults to Islam, and then quickly added: “"not particularly the one in Pakistan.”Hmmmm........Erdogan: "We Muslims want the same respect shown to Jewish culture, which we support,".....one quote to save for posterity.Read the full story here.

Shoebat Exclusive: ‘Innocence of Muslims’… a Game of Predators and Scapegoats.

Shoebat Exclusive: ‘Innocence of Muslims’… a Game of Predators and Scapegoats.By Walid Shoebat.The Innocence of Muslims and the spark of an Islamic revolution can be linked to a handful of culprits. The mystery is unlocked when we review the original YouTube page of one named Sam Bacile (the same name attributed to the filmmaker at one time).
Bacile forgot to cover his tracks, leaving two links to three very crucial videos. On the “Feed” tab are two of those videos. One features a Muslim named Wisam Abdul Waris, uploaded to YouTube on September 9th (linked from the Bacile page no later than September 10th). Wisam’s video was uploaded to Bacile’s page because Bacile commented on the video. Yet, when one attempts to view the comments, all have been scrubbed and the comment feature disabled, though the comment allegedly made by Sam Bacile appears on the “Feed” tab, just above the video.
The second video on the Sam Bacile “Feed” tab is none other Nader Bakkar, from as far back as May of 2012. This video was added to Bacile’s YouTube page as a “Favorite” about one week prior to the embassy attack in Cairo on 9/11.
The third video is on the “Likes” tab of the Sam Bacile YouTube page. It consists of an interview with an English speaking western woman who converted to Islam. Why would a supposed Christian filmmaker “like” this video? Who are these two named Wisam Abdul Waris and Nader Bakkar? Waris and Bakkar, the two main interests on Sam Bacile’s YouTube channel, were the two men we identified back on September 13th as being the two primary culprits behind the Cairo riots on 9/11. These two have been conspicuously absent, all along, from all western media narratives. For example, days after the attacks in Egypt and Libya, Reuters reported an incomplete narrative that the “flashpoint” of the violence was when Sheikh Khalid Abdallah on Al-Nas TV in Egypt aired portions of the film Innocence of Muslims.Read the full story here.

UN Dep Secr-Gen: " free speech not a fundamental right, but a “privilege” given to us by the U.N."

UN Dep Secr-Gen: " free speech not a fundamental right, but a “privilege” given to us by the U.N."(Heritage).By Brett Schaefer.

On Tuesday, United Nations Deputy Secretary-General Jan Eliasson characterized free speech not as a fundamental right, but as a “privilege” given to us by the U.N. Specifically, he referred to “the freedom of speech, the freedom of expression” as a: gift given to us by the [Universal] Declaration of Human Rights, but it also implies some type of responsibility to use that in such a way that you don’t cause situations.… [It is] a privilege that we have, which in my view involves also the need for respect, the need to avoid provocations, in a world where we have enough of contradictions and hatred. 

This opinion will come as a surprise to most Americans who don’t believe the U.N. has the authority to grant or, presumably, revoke our rights and freedoms.
Freedom of speech—a right considered by America’s founders to be endowed upon free people by our Creator, not by government—is one of the bedrock principles of our nation.

The First Amendment to our Constitution states: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. 

President Obama specifically referenced this principle in his speech last week to the U.N. General Assembly, noting, “I know there are some who ask why we don’t just ban such a video. And the answer is enshrined in our laws: Our Constitution protects the right to practice free speech.” Sounds good, right?
However, the President then repeatedly weakened and undermined his defense of free speech in his address to the assembled world leaders.
Indeed, the President backhandedly endorsed global efforts to restrict free speech—especially the “defamation of religions” resolutions offered by the Organization of the Islamic Conference in the U.N.—when he said:

The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. 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. 

This was a grievous mistake. Few, if any, nations defend freedom of speech as strongly as does the United States. If the U.S. goes wobbly on freedom of speech, other nations will surely take advantage. Historically, the U.S. has been the bulwark defending free speech from assault in the U.N. In Europe, governments support bans on hate speech.
In totalitarian states, governments repress political speech. In many predominantly Muslim nations, governments outlaw “blasphemy” and proselytism and any other speech and actions they deem insulting to Islam. In recent weeks, governments have been increasingly bold in asserting that speech be subject to restrictions based on how others might be offended or provoked. This is an outrageous assault on a fundamental right that, if realized, would render free speech meaningless.
The U.S. should denounce Eliasson’s comments and other assaults on free speech at the U.N. But U.S. officials cannot do that effectively when President Obama said essentially the same thing last week. The President’s half-hearted defense of free speech, weakened by caveats and conditions, has given the U.N. mandarins like Eliasson a green light to express their own skepticism—and repressive governments a handy tool to advance their agendas.

"Incoming" - UK signs agreement on “religious freedom” with OIC.

"Incoming" - UK signs agreement on “religious freedom” with OIC.(SEC).Concerns have been raised by the National Secular Society that the UK’s stance on free speech could be compromised by an agreement signed at the United Nations between this country and the Organisation of Islamic Co-operation (OIC). The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed by Baroness Sayeeda Warsi – the new “Minister for Faith” – and pledges that the UK and the OIC will “work together on issues of peace, stability and religious freedom.” At present, the OIC is agitating at the United Nations for a global blasphemy law that would make criticising or satirising religion a punishable offence. Terry Sanderson, president of the National Secular Society, said: “We are all for co-operation between nations to try to foster peace and understanding, but the concept of ‘religious freedom’ is one that the OIC has distorted to mean restrictions on free expression.

“We hope that by signing this document the UK will not in any way compromise its commitment to human rights – particularly the human right to free speech. The British Government has been steadfast in its opposition to the OIC’s blasphemy proposals up until now. We hope that this document will not change that in any way.”

Baroness Warsi’s other remit – as well as being ‘Minister for Faith’ – 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. She became the first British minister to speak at the OIC’s conference in June 2011 in Astana, Kazakstan. Previously she had hosted the secretary-general of the OIC in London and visited its secretariat in Jeddah, while she was in Saudi Arabia for performing Hajj. This led to the appointment of Britain’s first special representative to the organisation and its 57 members. Baroness Warsi has visited Pakistan five times during the past two and a half years in government, a country which was so central to the formation of the Islamic Conference. In the landmark agreement there is a particular emphasis on promoting the “key role Muslims have played in shaping modern Britain” and encouraging Muslim communities to play a key role at all levels in public life. Lady Warsi said: “When I addressed the OIC Conference in Kazakhstan in June 2011, I said we face the global challenges together.
This agreement formalises that, establishing our many, many areas of co-operation, from security to conflict prevention; from religious freedom to human rights. One of the central aims of my new role will be to strengthen this relationship further and I am looking forward to ensuring we continue to work closely to achieve our mutual goals.” She also praised the Framework Co-operation Agreement, signed with the OIC’s secretary-general, for its focus on promoting inter-religious understanding and interfaith dialogue, especially as these are two vital areas in the senior minister’s new governmental role. Terry Sanderson commented: “There is certainly a need for some kind of inter-religious understanding among OIC member states, a number of which suppress Christianity and other religions in a brutal and merciless fashion. “The blasphemy law which is being proposed by the OIC on behalf of its members would be an entirely dangerous and regressive step if it were to be approved at the UN. It is quite clear that it would be used to persecute and oppress non-Muslim minorities in Muslim-majority countries, as the domestic blasphemy law in Pakistan does at present. Mr Sanderson continued: “In Egypt the blasphemy laws are also used to get rid of political opponents and are sometimes used as a means of revenge by neighbours or colleagues who are in dispute. We do not need this kind of primitive legislation in our democracies and we need reassurance from our Government that their resolve remains unaffected by the signing of this agreement with the OIC.”Read the full story here.

How 'Religious Defamation' Laws Would Ban Islam

The link above goes to Fatwa #40378 of The Encyclopedia of Fatwas (Arabic: Mawsu’at al-Fatawi) on www.islamweb.net. Issued on November 23, 2003, it contains the standard question-and-answer format of a fatwa and reads thus in English translation: Judgment: Despising the Torah or the New Testament.


How 'Religious Defamation' Laws Would Ban Islam.(Aina).By Raymond Ibrahim. Frontpage Magazine.As the Islamic world, in the guise of the 57-member state Organization of Islamic Cooperation, continues to push for the enforcement of "religious defamation" laws in the international arena--theoretically developed to protect all religions from insult, but in reality made for Islam--one great irony is lost, especially on Muslims: if such laws would ban movies and cartoons that defame Islam, they would also, by logical extension, have to ban the religion of Islam itself--the only religion whose core texts actively defame other religions.
To understand this, consider what "defamation" means. Typical dictionary-definitions include "to blacken another's reputation" and "false or unjustified injury of the good reputation of another, as by slander or libel." In Muslim usage, defamation simply means anything that insults or offends Islamic sensibilities.
However, to gain traction among the international community, the OIC maintains that such laws should protect all religions from defamation, not just Islam. Accordingly, the OIC is agreeing that any expression that "slanders" the religious sentiments of others should be banned.
What, then, do we do with Islam's core religious texts--beginning with the Quran itself, which slanders, denigrates and blackens the reputation of other religions?
Consider Christianity alone:

1. Quran 5:73 declares that "Infidels are they who say Allah is one of three," a reference to the Christian Trinity; 
2. Quran 5:73 says "Infidels are they who say Allah is the Christ, [Jesus] son of Mary"; 
3. and Quran 9:30 complains that "the Christians say the Christ is the son of Allah … may Allah's curse be upon them!"

Considering that the word infidel (or kafir) is one of Islam's most derogatory terms, what if a Christian book or Western movie appeared declaring that "Infidels are they who say Muhammad is the prophet of God--may God's curse be upon them"? If Muslims would consider that a great defamation against Islam--and they would, with the attendant rioting, murders, etc.--then by the same standard it must be admitted that the Quran defames Christians and Christianity.
Similarly, consider how the Christian Cross, venerated among millions, is depicted--is defamed--in Islam: according to canonical hadiths, when he returns, Jesus supposedly will destroy all crosses; and Muhammad, who never allowed the cross in his presence, ordered someone wearing a cross to "take off that piece of idolatry."
What if Christian books or Western movies declared that the sacred things of Islam--say the Black Stone in the Ka'ba of Mecca--are "idolatry" and that Muhammad himself will return and destroy them? If Muslims would consider that defamation against Islam--and they would, with all the attendant rioting, murders, etc.--then by the same standard it must be admitted that the hadith defames the Christian Cross.
Here is a particularly odious form of defamation against Christian sentiment, especially to the millions of Catholic and Orthodox Christians.
According to Islam's most authoritative Quranic exegetes, including the revered Ibn Kathir, Muhammad is in paradise married to and having sex with the Virgin Mary.
What if a Christian book or Western movie portrayed, say, Muhammad's wife, Aisha the "Mother of Believers," as being married to and having sex with a false prophet in heaven? If Muslims would consider that a great defamation against Islam--and they would, with all the attendant rioting, murders, etc.--then by the same standard it must be admitted that Islam's most authoritative Quranic exegetes defame the Virgin Mary.
Nor does such defamation of Christianity occur in Islam's ancient texts only; modern day Muslim scholars and sheikhs agree that it is permissible to defame Christianity. Qatar-based "Islam Web" even issued a fatwa that legitimizes insulting Christianity.
Now consider the wording used by Muslim leaders calling on the U.N. to enforce religious defamation laws in response to the Muhammad film on YouTube, and how these expressions can easily be used against Islam:
The OIC "deplored… an offensive and derogatory film on the life of Prophet Muhammad" and "called on the producers to show respect to the religious sentiments held sacred by Muslims and those of other faiths."
But what about the "offensive and derogatory" depictions of Christianity in Islam's core texts? Are Muslims willing to expunge these from the Quran and hadith, "to show respect to the religious sentiments held sacred … by those of other faiths," in this case, Christians?Read the full story here.

Russian Duma Mulls Religious Offense Bill after attacks on Orthodox Christian sites.

The draft law also comes after four wooden crosses were chopped down in Russia’s regions last month 

Russian Duma Mulls Religious Offense Bill after attacks on Orthodox Christian sites.(RN).
Russia's parliament is considering amendments to the country's criminal code, under which causing religious offense will be a crime punishable by measures ranging from a one-off fine to five years behind bars. The initiative has so far found broad cross-party support in parliament, Yaroslav Nilov from the Liberal Democrat Party of Russia (LDPR) told journalists on Wednesday. "The LDPR worked with all the other parliamentary parties and a member of the Federation Council to prepare the draft law, and now the draft law on tightening responsibility for causing religious offense has been submitted" he said. Sergei Obukhov of Russia’s Communist Party, told RIA Novosti his party supports the draft law and said he hopes that it will come onto the statute book this session. “The state has a duty to protect the rights of its citizens to their religious views. Antireligious campaigns risk destabilizing society, and in the interests of public order, peace, and security there is a real need to toughen punishment for causing religious offence” Obukhov said. The Chair of the Duma Committee on Security and Anticorruption Measures, Irina Yarovaya, also backed the draft law, claiming offending religious sensibilities presents a very real danger to society as a whole, not just to the individual offended, because this "creates an atmosphere of conflict and mistrust." "Believers not only value what they themselves hold holy, but also the confidence that they have in the state's protection," she added.Read the full story here.

Related: Over 80% of Russians Favor ‘Blasphemy’ Draft Law - Survey.