John R. Houk
© December 6, 2012
Have you ever heard of the Bilderbergers? A group powerful politicians and wealthy people primarily from Europe and the USA have a semi-secret and an absolutely closed meeting on an annual basis. This group that meets annually has derived its name because the first known meeting place was the Bilderberg Hotel in the Netherlands.
A webpage that bills itself as the official website and is labeled Bilderberg Meetings can be read HERE. There is a huge amount of Conspiracy Theory websites that describe the Bilderbergers as a New World Order agenda group. I am using the Jeremiah Project merely because that is first the website I looked when I Googled “Bilderberger.” The Jeremiah Project writes about the nefarious nature of the Bilderbergers and can be read HERE.
Well check this out! Are you aware the Obama Administration has dispatched Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to a series of semi-secret meetings with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to participate in “classified” (i.e. Closed Meetings) to negotiate about criminalizing criticism of Islam? The meetings are called the Istanbul Process. I found a good summary about the Istanbul Process on the Gates of Vienna. Read the entire article but I think you can get the idea of the Istanbul Process and its agenda. Hillary Clinton is negotiating compliance (translate as dhimmitude) to this process which is a threat to the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
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.
1.
|
First, I will explain what is the OIC and what are its goals
| |
2.
|
Secondly I will develop the freedom- killing Islamic concept of “defamation of religions” supported by OIC and partly by the UN;
| |
3.
|
Third I will finish with the “Istanbul process” and the western reaction against OIC anti-freedom and theocratic agenda.
|
Below is an email from ACT for America that is just as much a fund raiser as it is informative. The part I want you to really take notice of is the “informative.” ACT for America is sending an article by Nina Shea that I noticed was actually picked up by a number media websites. After reading the informative it would not hurt to add a bit of support for ACT for America.
JRH 12/6/12
***************************
State Dept., OIC assault on free speech
Sent by ACT for America
Sent: 12/5/2012 2:22 PM
Obama Administration cooperates with the OIC’s assault on free speech!
If you cherish our First Amendment right of free speech, we urge you, as strongly as we can, to read the article below by Nina Shea about the Istanbul Process (highlights added), which was recently posted on National Review Online.
For over 18 months now, the Obama administration has been working with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) on what is known as the Istanbul Process.
The Istanbul Process has evolved into an assault on our free speech so serious that next year ACT! for America will launch a national campaign to expose what is happening and fight back against it.
It’s simply not possible to overstate how serious a threat this is to our First Amendment.
The Istanbul Process has evolved into an assault on our free speech so serious that next year ACT! for America will launch a national campaign to expose what is happening and fight back against it.
It’s simply not possible to overstate how serious a threat this is to our First Amendment.
You can help us prepare now for next year’s national campaign, by making a year-end contribution to ACT! for America’s 5th anniversary appeal, which we announced in September.
Simply go online here, make a $5 or more monthly commitment to ACT! for America’s Patriot Partner program, or a $30 or more single gift. When you do, you’ll be entered in a drawing to win one of two chances to have Brigitte Gabriel visit your community and meet with you and up to 25 of your friends.
You can also make a single gift by printing out a reply form here and mailing your contribution.
You can also make a single gift by printing out a reply form here and mailing your contribution.
We urge you, please, read the article below and help us prepare for next year’s campaign to protect free speech with your most generous contribution.
Because even if America succeeds in preventing every future terrorist attack, if we lose our freedom to speak out against radical Islam, a central tenet of sharia law will prevail in America and put a dagger in the heart of the First Amendment.
Here’s just one quote from the column below:
Judging from the 2011 session I was partially able to observe as a commissioner on the official U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, the point of the Istanbul Process is for the governments of the developed West [to] give an accounting to the governments of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, Qatar, and other key Muslim states on measures taken to stop American and other Western citizens from disparaging Islam.
America Again Submits to the Istanbul Process
By Nina Shea.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/334647/america-again-submits-istanbul-process-nina-shea
By Nina Shea.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/334647/america-again-submits-istanbul-process-nina-shea
Round three of the “Istanbul Process” opens today, December 3, and runs through Wednesday, at Canada House, in London, hosted by the U.K. and Canada. The Istanbul Process is Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s major transnational law initiative, undertaken in partnership with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). It was established last year to “implement” measures against speech and expression that negatively “stereotype[s]” Islam and Muslims, with a particular emphasis on enacting them in the West.
This initiative was started as an inexplicable, gratuitous gift to the Muslim world following the March 2011 adoption of a non-binding U.N. Human Rights Council resolution (16/18) on the same theme. While the Obama administration claims that it doesn’t intend for the process to adopt regulations beyond the American free-speech standard, our partner, the OIC, is only too eager to do just that.
For over a decade within the U.N., the OIC has relentlessly pushed for a universal law to punish blasphemy, or “defamation,” of Islam. This 56-member-state organization, an essentially religious body, is in fact chartered to “combat defamation of Islam.” It issues fatwas and other directives to punish public expression of apostasy from Islam. Its current action plan calls for “deterrent punishments” in all states for “Islamophobia,” a term that encompasses a broad range of constitutionally protected speech, judging from the OIC website’s black list of Americans and other perpetrators of “Islamophobia.” The OIC’s stated understanding of the Istanbul Process is that it will “help in enacting domestic laws for the countries involved in the issue, as well as formulating international laws preventing inciting hatred resulting from the continued defamation of religions.”
Corner readers will remember that the Istanbul Process’s first conference was co-chaired by Clinton and the OIC secretary general in July 2011, in Istanbul, with the foreign ministers of the Muslim countries in attendance. The second was held over three days of closed-door meetings last December, at the offices of the U.S. Department of State in Washington. That meeting drew enough controversy within free-speech circles to raise questions about whether the process would continue. But thanks to a leak last week by OIC head Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, we now know the event will go ahead, even if its agenda is still being treated like it’s “classified.”
Judging from the 2011 session I was partially able to observe as a commissioner on the official U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, the point of the Istanbul Process is for the governments of the developed West give an accounting to the governments of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, Qatar, and other key Muslim states on measures taken to stop American and other Western citizens from disparaging Islam. This puts our diplomats in a tight spot: Unlike virtually every other country represented in the conference hall, America does not protect any religion or any other body of ideas from criticism and ridicule. However, when we’re in the dock this time around, the U.S., represented by Dr. Suzan Johnson Cook, the administration’s severely marginalized ambassador-at-large for religious freedom, will have some measure of “progress” to report.
For example, the U.S.’s top intelligence official and its top commander in Afghanistan were again deployed to suppress blasphemy against Islam in Florida and, this time around, they succeeded. Last year, the efforts of our top authorities to stop Florida micro-church pastor Terry Jones from desecrating a Koran ended in failure. But this year, their resort to the “good offices” of Tampa socialite Jill Kelley proved an effective strategy. Her persuasive emails resulted in Florida talk-show host Bubba the Love Sponge’s standing down from deep frying a Koran, something he had threatened to do on-air. The OIC’s Ihsanoglu would likely rule Bubba was about to “abuse” freedom of expression by not being able (incontrovertibly, I should note) to pass a “responsible use” test.
That leads to our next plea: The administration has also adopted the OIC’s own standard of condemning the “abuse of free expression.” Or at least that is what it appeared to do on the website of the pivotal U.S. embassy to Egypt on September 11 this year. Our embassy declared on its homepage: “We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.”
But perhaps, the best evidence of America’s “implementation” in response to the Istanbul Process is the Justice Department’s dispatching the FBI a couple months ago to investigate Mark Basseley Youssef (a.k.a. Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, or Sam Bacile), the California Coptic filmmaker of “Innocence of Muslims,” the YouTube trailer that blasphemed the Muslim prophet. As Ambassador Cook can point out, this investigation has resulted in a creative criminal conviction of Youssef, and his being sentenced by a federal court to a year in prison. All the better for the U.S.’s reputation as implementers is that it will be lost on the conferees that Youssef has been imprisoned on a probation offense, à la Al Capone — though, unlike Capone, his underlying offense, without which he would not have been investigated, was making a crude, insulting video, which is hardly equivalent in American law to gangland massacres or racketeering. It, in fact, is not a crime at all. Thus, most important, the OIC’s take-away will be that in defense of Islam the U.S. government can and will regulate speech.
Nevertheless, none of this is likely to impress the Istanbul Process gathering. On its opening day last December, Saudi Arabia — headquarters to and godfather of the OIC — beheaded a Sudanese woman for “sorcery.” Last week, Egypt sentenced to death Youssef, Terry Jones, and six other Americans implicated in the blasphemous YouTube trailer. For the Istanbul Process that’s “best practices” for “implementation.” Thus, again, America will be judged to have fallen short, indignation will rise, and the Istanbul Process will need to ramp up its pressure.
— Nina Shea is director of the Hudson Institute’s Center for Religious Freedom and co-author with Paul Marshall of Silenced: How Apostasy and Blasphemy Codes Are Choking Freedom Worldwide.
This initiative was started as an inexplicable, gratuitous gift to the Muslim world following the March 2011 adoption of a non-binding U.N. Human Rights Council resolution (16/18) on the same theme. While the Obama administration claims that it doesn’t intend for the process to adopt regulations beyond the American free-speech standard, our partner, the OIC, is only too eager to do just that.
For over a decade within the U.N., the OIC has relentlessly pushed for a universal law to punish blasphemy, or “defamation,” of Islam. This 56-member-state organization, an essentially religious body, is in fact chartered to “combat defamation of Islam.” It issues fatwas and other directives to punish public expression of apostasy from Islam. Its current action plan calls for “deterrent punishments” in all states for “Islamophobia,” a term that encompasses a broad range of constitutionally protected speech, judging from the OIC website’s black list of Americans and other perpetrators of “Islamophobia.” The OIC’s stated understanding of the Istanbul Process is that it will “help in enacting domestic laws for the countries involved in the issue, as well as formulating international laws preventing inciting hatred resulting from the continued defamation of religions.”
Corner readers will remember that the Istanbul Process’s first conference was co-chaired by Clinton and the OIC secretary general in July 2011, in Istanbul, with the foreign ministers of the Muslim countries in attendance. The second was held over three days of closed-door meetings last December, at the offices of the U.S. Department of State in Washington. That meeting drew enough controversy within free-speech circles to raise questions about whether the process would continue. But thanks to a leak last week by OIC head Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, we now know the event will go ahead, even if its agenda is still being treated like it’s “classified.”
Judging from the 2011 session I was partially able to observe as a commissioner on the official U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, the point of the Istanbul Process is for the governments of the developed West give an accounting to the governments of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, Qatar, and other key Muslim states on measures taken to stop American and other Western citizens from disparaging Islam. This puts our diplomats in a tight spot: Unlike virtually every other country represented in the conference hall, America does not protect any religion or any other body of ideas from criticism and ridicule. However, when we’re in the dock this time around, the U.S., represented by Dr. Suzan Johnson Cook, the administration’s severely marginalized ambassador-at-large for religious freedom, will have some measure of “progress” to report.
For example, the U.S.’s top intelligence official and its top commander in Afghanistan were again deployed to suppress blasphemy against Islam in Florida and, this time around, they succeeded. Last year, the efforts of our top authorities to stop Florida micro-church pastor Terry Jones from desecrating a Koran ended in failure. But this year, their resort to the “good offices” of Tampa socialite Jill Kelley proved an effective strategy. Her persuasive emails resulted in Florida talk-show host Bubba the Love Sponge’s standing down from deep frying a Koran, something he had threatened to do on-air. The OIC’s Ihsanoglu would likely rule Bubba was about to “abuse” freedom of expression by not being able (incontrovertibly, I should note) to pass a “responsible use” test.
That leads to our next plea: The administration has also adopted the OIC’s own standard of condemning the “abuse of free expression.” Or at least that is what it appeared to do on the website of the pivotal U.S. embassy to Egypt on September 11 this year. Our embassy declared on its homepage: “We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.”
But perhaps, the best evidence of America’s “implementation” in response to the Istanbul Process is the Justice Department’s dispatching the FBI a couple months ago to investigate Mark Basseley Youssef (a.k.a. Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, or Sam Bacile), the California Coptic filmmaker of “Innocence of Muslims,” the YouTube trailer that blasphemed the Muslim prophet. As Ambassador Cook can point out, this investigation has resulted in a creative criminal conviction of Youssef, and his being sentenced by a federal court to a year in prison. All the better for the U.S.’s reputation as implementers is that it will be lost on the conferees that Youssef has been imprisoned on a probation offense, à la Al Capone — though, unlike Capone, his underlying offense, without which he would not have been investigated, was making a crude, insulting video, which is hardly equivalent in American law to gangland massacres or racketeering. It, in fact, is not a crime at all. Thus, most important, the OIC’s take-away will be that in defense of Islam the U.S. government can and will regulate speech.
Nevertheless, none of this is likely to impress the Istanbul Process gathering. On its opening day last December, Saudi Arabia — headquarters to and godfather of the OIC — beheaded a Sudanese woman for “sorcery.” Last week, Egypt sentenced to death Youssef, Terry Jones, and six other Americans implicated in the blasphemous YouTube trailer. For the Istanbul Process that’s “best practices” for “implementation.” Thus, again, America will be judged to have fallen short, indignation will rise, and the Istanbul Process will need to ramp up its pressure.
— Nina Shea is director of the Hudson Institute’s Center for Religious Freedom and co-author with Paul Marshall of Silenced: How Apostasy and Blasphemy Codes Are Choking Freedom Worldwide.
______________________________________
Obama Rendering Constitution to Dhimmitude to the OIC
John R. Houk
© December 6, 2012
_____________________________________
State Dept., OIC assault on free speech
ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam. We are only as strong as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more secure.
No comments:
Post a Comment