It’s all in the name isn’t it? The powerful UN body known as the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) has changed it’s name to Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). If it weren’t so dangerous, it would be a belly laugh. Obama has joined with the OIC to combat “Islamophobia.” Just once I would like to gear this president speak out against Islam’s Infidelophobia. But, there will be no cooperation with OIC about anything Western, and indeed, it is not Obama’s mission to get the OIC to cooperate, but rather, the exact opposite. The joint ‘cooperation’ with our American president has something to do with freedom of speech, theirs, not ours.
With the United States providing this new world stage for presenting grievances of “Islamophobia” against the West, the OIC rallied around the initiative as the propaganda windfall that it is. It promptly reasserted its demands for global blasphemy laws, once again sounding the call of its failed U.N. campaign for international laws against the so-called defamation of Islam. It has made plain its aim to use the upcoming conference to further pressure Western governments to regulate speech on behalf of Islam. ~ Nina Shea, National Review Online
First a few words about who and what the OIC is. There are 57 Muslim member states (including the ‘state’ of Palestine), [now we know why Obama thinks there are 57 states] inside the United Nations. Formed in 1969 in response to the 1967 Arab-Israel war, they are a permanent delegation, and they say they are the second largest international organization next to the United Nations.
The OIC declaration on Human Rights in Islam was set in stone in Cairo, Egypt in 1990 when it declared that their perspective on Human Rights in Islam affirmed Islamic Shariah Law as its sole source. This meant no Human Rights for women, Muslim or otherwise. If you are familiar with Shariah Law, this article, without an agenda, shows the hypocrisy of Islam and Human Rights.
The short and simple story is, the OIC comes to a consensus about an issue, and then member states within the U.N. serving on committees and such (having power when the entire OIC does not) are pledged to do the bidding of the OIC. So much for ‘cooperation’ with anything ‘Western.’
My go-to source for the antics of the OIC is Anne Bayefsky, of the Hudson Institute and UN Watch. Her report this April, for example, reminds us that for 15 years the U.N. has operated without defining the word ‘terror.’ In another try last Spring, the OIC thwarted the effort once again. This from Bayefsky [emphasis mine]:
Negotiations began back in 1996, and courtesy of American taxpayer dollars, they pick up now and again about every six months. Back in 2003, there was a draft put forward by a coordinator charged with bridging gaps, but the OIC objected because a definition of terrorism should “distinguish it from the legitimate struggle of peoples against foreign occupation.” To be sure, the OIC and the entire Muslim world sees the 9/11/01 attacks on America as their “legitimate struggle against peoples of foreign occupation.”
How does a world body fight ‘terror’ when they cannot decide what terror is? Just as Bill Clinton said, having sex with Monica depended on what the “definition of is, is,” most Muslim countries will not be declared terrorist states because the U.N. cannot decide what ‘terrorism’ ism inside the U.N., other than to insist the real terrorist in the U.N. is Israel.
So, here is what Obama is doing with the OIC (from the Nina Shea’s article at National Journal Online linked above) [emphasis mine]:
The administration is taking the lead in an international effort to “implement” a U.N. resolution against religious “stereotyping,” specifically as applied to Islam. To be sure, it argues that the effort should not result in free-speech curbs. However, its partners in the collaboration, the 56 member states of the OIC, have no such qualms. Many of them police private speech through Islamic blasphemy laws and the OIC has long worked to see such codes applied universally. Under Muslim pressure, Western Europe now has laws against religious hate speech that serve as proxies for Islamic blasphemy codes.
Last March, U.S. diplomats maneuvered the adoption of Resolution 16/18 within the U.N. Human Rights Council (HRC). Non-binding, this resolution, inter alia, expresses concern about religious “stereotyping” and “negative profiling” but does not limit free speech. It was intended to — and did — replace the OIC’s decidedly dangerous resolution against “defamation of religions,” which protected religious institutions instead of individual freedoms.
The efforts of the U.S. in March were the starting point, disguising what is to come:
But thanks to a puzzling U.S. diplomatic initiative that was unveiled in July, Resolution 16/18 is poised to become a springboard for a greatly reinvigorated international effort to criminalize speech against Islam, the very thing it was designed to quash.
Citing a need to “move to implementation” of Resolution 16/18, the Obama administration has inexplicably decided to launch a major international effort against Islamophobia in partnership with the Saudi-based OIC. This is being voluntarily assumed at American expense, outside the U.N. framework, and is not required by the resolution itself.
On July 15, a few days after the Norway massacre, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton co-chaired an OIC session in Istanbul on religious intolerance. It was there that she announced the initiative, inviting the OIC member-states’ foreign ministers and representatives to the inaugural meeting of the effort that the U.S. government would host this fall in Washington. She envisions it as the first in a series of meetings to decide how best to implement Resolution 16/18.
It will be interesting to see if Europe cooperates with Obama’s plan. They are already deep in dhimmitude, so I’m betting they will. Occasionally I repeat my prediction that when Obama leaves the White House, sooner or later, he will be the become the U.N. Secretary-General. The U.S. presidential pension and other perks will make life easy for him, but filling the U.N. Secretary-General spot will make him King of the World. Asking again, when will the most dangerous threat to our First Amendment since WWII, Barack Obama, speak about Infidelophobia? The answer is never. Read more about the OIC at Atlas Shrugs. Thanks to Big Peace for the graphic and more on the OIC.