Some people might recall a barely-reported UN vote from late March where the Organisation of the Islamic Conference, with the help of China and Russia and other friendly faces, managed to amend the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to allow states to have basically free rein to decide when they think freedom of speech is and is not appropriate.
Now, thanks to The Contentious Centrist, I learn of a new development. From UN Watch:
Geneva — From now on, all references to human rights violations related to Islamic Shar’ia law are prohibited in the chamber of the UN Human Rights Council. So ruled council president Doru Costea after a dramatic debate in the recently concluded June session.
It all started when veteran rights activist David Littman — undaunted by the repressive regimes who only last month sought to expel him from the UN — tried to deliver a speech on violence against women and what Islamic scholars can do to prevent it.
Egypt’s Amr Roshdy Hassan repeatedly interrupted, aggressively challenging the council president: “Regardless of the result of the vote — I couldn’t care less if I will win or lose this vote — my point is that Islam will not be crucified in this council!”The president ultimately gave in, declaring: “Statements should refrain from making judgments or evaluations of a particular religion. . . I can promise that at the next evaluation of a religious creed, law, or document, I will interrupt the speaker and we’ll go on to the next one.”
The new ruling follows an Islamic-sponsored text adopted by the council in March that turned its mandate on freedom of expression upside down. Instead of investigating the actions of governments in order to protect individual freedom, the expert is now charged with investigating individuals — those who “abuse” their freedom of speech through religious or racial discrimination, i.e., by saying anything deemed offensive to Islamic sensibilities. Everyone in the world is now potentially subject to the UN’s new speech control.
What does all of this signify?
An iron curtain has descended across the world’s highest human rights body. Behind that line lie all the human rights violations committed in the name of a certain religion, about which no one dare speak: suicide terror attacks, honor killings, female genital mutilation, forced child marriage, violence against gays, stonings, state censorship of free speech, jailing of bloggers, prohibitions against freedom of religion, and much, much more.
UN officials, diplomats and even major human rights figures have been afraid to take on this new regime, which now exercises an almost total control over the Human Rights Council, as well as increasing measures of influence over other forums of world opinion.
“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil,” said Edmund Burke, “is that good men do nothing.” Would that more people showed the courage of Mr. Littman.
All this rubbish from the oligarchs and dictators about not offending Islam poorly obfuscates the fact that the principal victims of the oppression carried out by these states are themselves Muslims. I won’t listen to pricks from places like Saudi Arabia and Iran, whose main occupations are to tell other Muslims that their brand of Islam is not the right one and to throw them in jail when they won’t obey, lecture people about offending religion.
Maybe United Nations declarations of this kind are largely symbolic anyway, but if they were entirely insignificant then these scumbags wouldn’t be trying so hard to twist them to their own end. We should be able to stand up and say that we, too, have firm principles that demand respect, and that if it comes down to it we too are capable of taking offense (thanks Hitch).
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights should be just that – universal. If it is to be amended, it should only be in order to expand it. It should be something that we aspire to as nations and as a global community, not something easily modified and defecated upon by shameless thugs and bullies.
