| In this mailing: - Judith Bergman: UK: The Push to End Free Speech
- Uzay Bulut: Turkey: Alarming Crackdown on Journalists, Desperate Appeal to UN
by Judith Bergman • September 17, 2019 at 5:00 am -
"We are concerned that the definition... could be used to challenge legitimate free speech on the historical or theological actions of Islamic states. There is also a risk it could also undermine counter-terrorism powers, which seek to tackle extremism or prevent terrorism." — Martin Hewitt, Chair, National Police Chiefs' Council.
-
Islam represents an idea, not a nationality or an ethnicity. The conventional purpose of most hate-speech laws is to protect people from hatred, not ideas.
-
The new proposed definition would criminalize criticism of Islam. Considering the origins of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims, that is probably the whole point.
-
"[A]n alternative definition of Anti-Muslim Hatred should be specific and narrow. It should focus on addressing bigotry directed at individuals, and avoid censoring debate or freedom of expression on religion. Finally, a comprehensive definition of Anti-Muslim Hatred must take intra-Muslim hatred into account to protect those who want to speak freely or express themselves differently." — Nikita Malik, Forbes, May 20, 2019.
 Martin Hewitt, Chair of Britain's National Police Chiefs' Council, recently said: "We are concerned that the definition... could be used to challenge legitimate free speech on the historical or theological actions... There is also a risk it could also undermine counter-terrorism powers, which seek to tackle extremism or prevent terrorism." (Photo by Anthony Devlin - WPA Pool / Getty Images) In April 2018, Britain's All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims began work on establishing a "working definition of Islamophobia that can be widely accepted by Muslims, political parties and the government". In December 2018, the group concluded its work with a "Report on the inquiry into a working definition of Islamophobia / anti-Muslim hatred." The report defines "Islamophobia" as a form of racism, conflating religion with ethnic origin or nationality: "Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness."[1] The report, furthermore, claims that a definition of Islamophobia is "instrumental" to "the political will and institutional determination to tackle it." by Uzay Bulut • September 17, 2019 at 4:00 am -
The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention was held on September 13. Sadly, no one at the meeting addressed the persecution of journalists in Turkey -- not José Guevara Bermúdez, Chair-Rapporteur of the Working Group, nor Béla Szombati, who represented the European Union, nor any other participant.
-
Amnesty International recently tagged Turkey the "world's largest prison for journalists."
-
The United Nations Human Rights Council, if it wishes to change its image from that of a laughing stock, should put at the top of its agenda calling Ankara to task. Meanwhile, however, Erdoğan's violations of freedom of speech need to be exposed daily and loudly condemned -- not only by members of the UN and the media, but by any and all allies of Turkey -- and freedom of expression -- in the West.
 (Image source: iStock) International human-rights and press-freedom organizations recently appealed to the United Nations to take action against the ongoing abuse of journalists by the government of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. In a letter to the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) on September 3, eighteen organizations -- led by the group ARTICLE 19, which promotes freedom of expression -- called on "all Member and Observer States committed to media freedom, democracy and the rule of law" to "speak out and address the Turkish government's repressive campaign against freedom of expression" in the forum of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention during the UNHRC's 42nd regular session. The letter reads, in part: |
|
2 comments:
In the same inclusive manner then,during WWII,Britain should have invited Germany into their country.
"Knock knock."
"Who's there?"
"Nazis."
"Oh by all means...come in.I see you have a few friends with you who have some symbols on your uniforms.What do you plan to do here?"
(mumbling amongst selves)
"Take over ze country"(elbow from other Nazis)
"I mean have a cup of tea."
"Very good,delightful to have you join us.What's the total number of friends who are with you?"
"Dat is a very good question.Just write down,the entire Nazi army--ze numbers change on a daily basis."
"I'm not sure if we have enough room in our country for an entire army."
"Trust us,we vill make room..."(Nazi laughter).
This is not a race issue with Muslims per se,it's the political and dogmatic intent of the Muslim religion whose goal is to annex countries around the world.Don't Brits read their history books?
Inviting Muslims in now,would be like inviting Nazis in circa 1940--tantamount to suicide--which it is today as well.
---GRA
"working definition of Islamophobia that can be widely accepted by Muslims"
What ever the Muslim says it is IS. And understand that Kaffir. And obey. Kaffir cannot define what is acceptable and what not is.
Look at the face on the goon. A more vapid individual you might find anywhere.
Post a Comment