Pierdolenie o Szopenie

Selaa blogimerkintöjä

1. The UN 1999-2010 continuing 'Anti-Blasphemy' resolutions
The defamation of religion should be criminalized. So says The UN Council passing on resolutions for it's member countries since 1999. Behind these 'Anti-Blasphemy' resolutions is the strongest bloc inside the UN: the OIC – namely the Muslim countries. They also continue to try to make these resolutions binding on UN member countries, basically the whole world, even if these resolutions would and do violate the constitutional laws in many countries which have already progressed from this lawbinded worldview where God is great and he gives the law to the people, through His closest servants, the priests. Bringing religion back to the position where one has to hear it's opinion about your opinions is excatly what should not come back.
Somehow proponents of 'Anti-Blasphemy' resolutions don't manage to make themselves understand that the real problem is political religion itself, not criticizing of it. Political religion passing on fully biased resolutions to protect itself from any kind of behavior that it doesn't like is not what the UN should be doing, quite the opposite, the UN should be in the forefront of those organizations which are protecting us from these kind of Middle Age laws which violate the basic human rights of freedom of speech and freedom of thought.
I will still keep doubting the existence of God, and sometimes I might even write some words about it. "Blasphemy" is not, and should not be, any kind of crime in modern world.
In 2009 the same group also tried to pass UN resolution which would have condemded 'defamation of religion as racism' (having to do with the cartoons drawn about Mohammad). This, luckily for free thinkers, didn't pass; unlike all the other 'Anti-Blasphemy' resolutions which the OIC group with it's supporters were able to push through. And this leads us to the second issue on UN bias.

"UN anti-blasphemy measures have sinister goals, observers say"

2. The UN 'Anti-Racism' conferences 2001 and 2009
Both held in Durban, both came to be OIC manifestations against the one country singled out from the all too wide group of countries that violate human rights - Israel. Durban 2009 conference opened by leader of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, with speech concentrating to bash Israel, opening that set the tone for the conference.
After the Ahmadinejad speech some uncorrupted human rights groups pointed out that discrimination was widespread in Iran, amongst others against Baha'is, Christians, Jews, Kurds, Sufi and Sunni muslims. But this was not conference for objectivity.
I know there are many people in the Middle East and Muslim Arab world who are being fed up with the phenomena that every time when human rights issues come up for them the subject is almost automatically reflected towards Israel. They are fed up because they themselves live in states that use torture, rape and murder as legitimate ways to answer their own citizens for wanting to have say on their own internal affairs.
I find it dubious that anti-racism conference is turned into anti-Israel conference whereas the Arab League can stand and support it's member country's actions in Darfur where Sudanese Muslim Arab Janjaweed-militias have butchered some 150,000 Christian and Animist native Africans, sometimes in most imaginable brutal ways. Somehow this doesn't become moral problem for the Arab League. The issue remains (since OIC has the majority) that no action will be taken against Sudan, in the last hand this is guaranteed by China which will protect it's business partner sitting in Khartoum, the mass murderer government of Sudan, by it's right to use veto for UN resolutions.
The issue of discrimination against homosexuals was, naturally, not addressed. Even though, or precisely because, in number of OIC countries homosexuality is punishable by death.
On his return to Tehran Ahmadinejad received hero's welcome with crowd waving sings with the text ”Death to Israel” on them. I also do know that there are many hundreds of thousands of people in Iran who actively oppose Ahmadinejad and the current Theocratic regime. Ahmadinejad likes to appaer as peoples man but when he rallies into Universities he has been met with large groups of students with signs ”Go away Fascist President”.
Again, platform that should be made to think ways for fighting racism and discrimination, a serious worldwide phenomenon, is turned into politically-motivated anti-Israeli farce. I conclude that 1) The UN bodies UNCHR and UNGA (which deal with human rights issues) have been abducted by people who could not care less about human rights – except when only they themselves gain from these rights. 2) This is yet one more example of how the Israeli-Palestinian crisis is used by many as a black hole that consumes attention from all other political and human rights causes, even from much more severe ones.

Comparison of on-going major conflicts in the world and number of UN resolutions on them:,_Palestine,_and_the_United_Nations#Resolutions_in_comparison_with_other_conflicts

“On one side, supporters of Israel feel that it is harshly judged by standards that are not applied to its enemies,” he said. “And too often this is true, particularly in some UN bodies.” -Kofi Annan, the former Secretary-General of UN on 20/09/2006

3. The UN stance on Drug Policies
The UN contradicts itself on Drug Policy. Read about UN self-cencorship here (blog of Guttersniper, in Finnish): Guttersniper

Etkö vielä ole jäsen?

Liity ilmaiseksi

Rekisteröityneenä käyttäjänä voisit

Lukea ja kirjoittaa kommentteja, kirjoittaa blogia ja keskustella muiden käyttäjien kanssa lukuisissa yhteisöissä.