| |
|
7. desember 2005
|
|
When ambassadors from a number of Islamic countries demanded an apology for a series of cartoons of the prophet Muhammad in the daily Jyllands-Posten, Denmark's prime minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen simply told them to stuff it, saying he neither wants nor can interfere with Danish media's freedom of speech.
Now, the United Nations has come down against that freedom of speech.
The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights understands the concern in Muslim countries over the 12 cartoons of the prophet Muhammad and expects UN experts on racism to deal with the matter. At the same time as Islamic countries in a meeting in Mecca are going to discuss joint action against Denmark, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour has involved herself in the discussion.
The leader of the UN's work on human rights is saying in plain words that she is concerned over the drawings that Jyllands-Posten printed in September, expressing "apologies" for statements and actions demonstrating a lack of respect for the religion of other people. In a letter to the 56 member countries of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), she states: "I understand your concerns and would like to emphasize that I regret any statement or act that could express a lack of respect for the religion of others". In a complaint to the High Commissioner, the 56 Islamic governments have asked Louise Arbour to raise the matter with the Danish government "to help contain this encroachment on Islam, so the situation won't get out of control." Two UN experts, on religous freedom and on racism and xenophobia, are said to be working on the case. The Islamic governments have expressed satisfaction with the reply from Louise Arbour.
Read the whole thing.
And, would you believe it, the alleged human rights organisation Amnesty International supports these attacks on freedom of speech in Denmark, also according to Berlingske Tidende..
Let's make one thing clear: For decades, Christians have been forced to put up with a significant number of insults to their faith, including cartoons, plays, movies, music and of course articles and books. Muslims living in the west simply have to put up with the same thing, and that is non-negotiable in our societies.
To non-Muslims, Muhammad was just another guy, one who didn't speak for God and in fact did and said many things we consider wrong or even abhorrent. We reserve the right to say so, as Muslims have a right to disagree and express this disagreement.
Islam is not a race, thus criticism or ridicule of Islam has nothing to do with racism. Criticism of ideas, including religious ideas, is a cornerstone of democracy. Even if it is made in bad taste, or is unfair, you are allowed to criticise, satirize and ridicule religions. It may not be in good taste, or polite, but it is legal, should remain legal and those who do not accept this simple fact better find themselves some backwards little thugocracy to live in.
The United Nations have for too long been doing the bidding of despots and extremists. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour is clearly an opponent of human rights and should be fired.
11:07:23 PM 
|
|
On Tuesday, David Cameron has been chosen as leader for the British conservative party, the Tories, bringing to it some youthful ambition and charisma. Time will tell whether a "Tory Blair" can bring the party back into power.
And today, I just heard that former Tory leader and prime minister Margaret Thatcher has been taken to hospital after falling ill. She surely brought about a new era of British political life when she became the country's first woman prime minister in 1979, and was also instrumental in the political strategy that brought down the iron curtain in Europe. I hope the 80-year-old "iron lady" has a safe recovery.
Update: Baroness Thatcher has now left the hospital, telling journalists "I feel fine." The hospital said she had been given a "clean bill of health."
10:12:11 PM
|
|
US air marshalls have shot and killed a man on Miami International Airport after he "indicated" there was a bomb in his carryon bag.
The man's name was not immediately released. He was a 44-year-old United States citizen, said Homeland Security Department spokeswoman Joanna Gonzalez.
Homeland Security spokesman Brian Doyle said after the plane had parked at the gate, a passenger indicated there was a bomb in the passenger's carryon bag. The passenger was confronted by air marshals but ran off the plane.
A team of air marshals pursued and ordered the passenger to get on the ground. The passenger did not comply and was shot when apparently reaching into a bag, Doyle said. He said this is the first time an air marshal has shot at a passenger or suspect.
Apparently, the man was not a terrorist:
A woman, apparently the man's wife, said he suffered from bipolar disorder and had not taken his medication, Gardner said.
Tragic, if true. But air marshalls can't do diagnoses; they have to take such threats seriously. After all, the plane was en route to Medellin, Colombia...
10:03:37 PM
|
|
 People say: Let's just torture the bastards!
Most Americans and a majority of people in Britain, France and South Korea say torturing terrorism suspects is justified at least in rare instances, according to AP-Ipsos polling. [...]
The polling, in the United States and eight of its closest allies, found that in Canada, Mexico and Germany people are divided on whether torture is ever justified. Most people opposed torture under any circumstances in Spain and Italy. [...]
In America, 61 percent of those surveyed agreed torture is justified at least on rare occasions. Almost nine in 10 in South Korea and just over half in France and Britain felt that way.
The problem is that those "rare instances" tend to become less rare once government agencies are given the green light to use devious interrogation methods on the suspects. So I think I am pretty undecided but very uneasy about the subject matter.
A case in point is a man like Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the captured al-Qaeda leader who had intimate knowledge of terror cells and future terrorist strikes. Forcing him to talk can save thousands of lives (based on the intelligence rumour mill, he did, and it did).
A counterpoint is German national Khaled al-Masri, who was falsely suspected of being a terrorist, taken in Macedonia, and allegedly subjected to some nasty treatment in Afghanistan. He now sues the CIA with legal aid from the ACLU. Unleashing the dogs of war gets a lot of innocent people hurt.
One argument that is surprisingly frequently made about torture is that it doesn't work. I wish people used a bit of common sense before saying such nonsense. True, torture makes people say anything you want them to, so it's worthless to obtain confessions. But, and that is the point so generously conceded in the preceding argument, you can make people reveal information they would otherwise keep secret.
To those who insist that torture never works, I sugggest a bet: You sign an agreement that the content of your well-filled bank account belongs to me if I am able to torture the CC# and pin code out of you over, say, 24 hours. If you win, you keep your bank account, and I'll even send flowers and a "get well" card to your hospital bed.
3:03:02 PM
|
|
A report published by the US Army War College says Israel lacks sufficient long-range capability to stop Iran's nuclear programme.
"The Israeli Air Force has formidable capabilities and enjoys unchallenged supremacy vis-à-vis the other Middle East air powers, but Israel has no aircraft carriers and it cannot use airbases in other Middle East states," the report entitled "Getting Ready for a Nuclear-Ready Iran," said. "Therefore its operational capabilities are reduced when the targets are located far from its territory."[...]
Brom said Israel's intelligence and military community was divided over the Iranian threat. He said military intelligence regards Iran as determined to destroy Israel. The Mossad and National Security Council see Teheran as preoccupied with national defense and regime survival.
"While the first school assumes no political pressure can force Iran to stop its military nuclear program, the other school believes that political pressure can be effective in at least delaying the nuclear program significantly," the report said. "The second school believes that a nuclear Iran with a different regime will not pose a high risk to Israel and can be easily deterred."
The report said the Bushehr nuclear power plant was vulnerable to attacks but does not constitute a key element of the military nuclear program. As a result, the destruction of Bushehr would not have a significant effect on Iran's military program.
Iran has learned from Israel knocking out Iraq's nuclear programme, and has distributed its capabilities to make a single knock-out blow impossible.
Russia selling $1bn worth of air defence weapons to Iran is surely not going to be helpful.
For the US government, this situation poses a scary dilemma. If the US Air Force, certainly not lacking in capability, should be given the task of taking out Iran's nuclear capabilities, the US could just as well pull out of Iraq immediately and consider the mission lost. Not even the most pro-US elements in Iraq will support, not even tolerate, a defensive military operation against Iran to defend or aid Israel. Even an Israeli attack without direct US support would inflame the tensions to an extreme level.
It all adds up to the debate within the Israeli intelligence communities: Will an Iran with nuclear capability use it merely as a deterrent and bargaining chip, or will it truly make good of its promise to wipe out the Jewish state. Can Israel even afford to assume anything on this question?
Even if Iran is not planning to become a nation-suicide-bomber in this way, it is clear that a nuclear Iran would be untouchable. It could many-fold its active support of international terrorism. It could really wreck havoc in Iraq, with impunity. It has unique capabilities to strangle the world's oil supply through the Hormuz straight.
There are so many scary prospects in this issue, and so few good options, that this is undoubtedly the most dangerous situation in the world right now, whatever the press may think about alleged CIA prison camps in Europe.
Link: Getting Ready for a Nuclear Iran [PDF]
1:07:14 AM
|
|
|
© Copyright 2006 Jan Haugland.
Last update: 01.01.2006; 00:10:40.
|
|
|
