Yes, Dems Are to Blame for the Assassination Attempts on Trump
Major Newspapers Sanitize Second Trump Assassination Attempt Since It Makes Dems Look Bad
NAACP Poll Is Brutal for Kamala
Democrats Aren’t Going to Stop If They Kill Trump
Selective Justice and the Trump Assassination Attempt: Garland’s DOJ in Crisis
The Reasons Young Women Embrace the Left Do Not Reflect Well on These...
Newly Registered Pennsylvania Voter Motivated by Economic Circumstances
Socialized Medicine: The Consequences
Senator J.D. Vance Is the Capstone for the MAGA Legacy
The Man in the Blue Suit
Fascism: Turning the US Into a 70 Percent Consumption Economy
The U.S. Constitution is the Last Bulwark Against Global Tyranny
Firing Incompetent People Is Necessary
Jennings Has a Message for Those Complaining About 'Both Sides' After Trump Assassination...
Now Is the Time to Reject Political Censorship and the Violence That Comes...
Tipsheet

Obama Team Champions UN Resolution to Protect Radical Islam & Restrict Free Speech

The United States has partnered with Egypt to draft international legislation that protects radical Islam and inhibits freedom of speech.

For a complete analysis, Anne Bayefsky from
Advertisement
Eye on the UN examines the treaty at the Weekly Standard:
The new resolution, championed by the Obama administration, has a number of disturbing elements. It emphasizes that "the exercise of the right to freedom of expression carries with it special duties and responsibilities . . ." which include taking action against anything meeting the description of "negative racial and religious stereotyping." It also purports to "recognize . . . the moral and social responsibilities of the media" and supports "the media's elaboration of voluntary codes of professional ethical conduct" in relation to "combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance."

Pakistan's Ambassador Zamir Akram, speaking on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, made it clear that they understand the resolution and its protection against religious stereotyping as allowing free speech to be trumped by anything that defames or negatively stereotypes religion. The idea of protecting the human rights "of religions" instead of individuals is a favorite of those countries that do not protect free speech and which use religion--as defined by government--to curtail it.

Even the normally feeble European Union tried to salvage the American capitulation by expressing the hope that the resolution might be read a different way. Speaking on behalf of the EU following the resolution's adoption, French Ambassador Jean-Baptiste Matt?i declared that "human rights law does not, and should not, protect religions or belief systems, hence the language on stereotyping only applies to stereotyping of individuals . . . and not of ideologies, religions or abstract values. The EU rejects the concept of defamation of religions." The EU also distanced itself from the American compromise on the media, declaring that "the notion of a moral and social responsibility of the media" goes "well beyond" existing international law and "the EU cannot subscribe to this concept in such general terms."
Advertisement

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement